Apple Keynote: All Music DRM Free this year

[stuckless]

Engadget is doing it's yearly update on the Apple Keynote. Mostly dull stuff, but it appears that Apple is going to be 100% DRM free for all music by the end of the first quarter.

I wonder if the TV and Video execs will ever wake up and realize the DRM TV shows and videos is also bad?

[Brent]

Originally Posted by stuckless

...it appears that Apple is going to be 100% DRM free for all music by the end of the first quarter.

They're also opening the door to two different pricing structures $0.69 and $1.29. I still prefer Amazon.com's mp3s, but this is definitely a step in the right direction.

I wonder if the TV and Video execs will ever wake up and realize the DRM TV shows and videos is also bad?

Some day, but probably not anytime soon. They are getting braver for sure and are at least realizing they need to evolve a bit, but we're not there yet unfortunately.

[pawn]

Too late. How about fixing the old files I (sorry...my wife) wasted money on and we can't use them for anything.

[stuckless]

Next, I wish they would remove the stupid geographic restrictions. (both amazon and apple). I can't count the number of times I've tried to buy a song, in Canada, but itunes and amazon will not let me do it. Yet, I can go to the store and buy it, just not online. It's gotten to the point that rarely go looking any more

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by pawn

Too late. How about fixing the old files I (sorry...my wife) wasted money on and we can't use them for anything.

You can "upgrade" them supposedly.

[Brent]

I already "upgraded" mine with a CD burner. And then purchased from Amazon after that. But I'll buy from both iTunes and Amazon going forward. No DRM is a good thing.

[wayner]

Originally Posted by stuckless

Next, I wish they would remove the stupid geographic restrictions. (both amazon and apple). I can't count the number of times I've tried to buy a song, in Canada, but itunes and amazon will not let me do it. Yet, I can go to the store and buy it, just not online. It's gotten to the point that rarely go looking any more

To me this is a huge issue and it is even bigger with video where sites like Hulu, Netflix, etc. do not exist if you are located outside of the US.

When it comes to media it is not a World Wide Web at all - there are still massive geographic borders in place.

[sandor]

Originally Posted by Brent

They're also opening the door to two different pricing structures $0.69 and $1.29. I still prefer Amazon.com's mp3s, but this is definitely a step in the right direction.


Some day, but probably not anytime soon. They are getting braver for sure and are at least realizing they need to evolve a bit, but we're not there yet unfortunately.

but, like h.264 compared to mpeg-2, AAC is bit for bit a better encode than MP3.

So iTune's 256 kbps AAC files should be higher fidelity than Amazon's 256 kbps MP3 files.

[sandor]

oh, and upgrading is 30 cents per song and gets you the DRM free 256 kbps file versus the 128 kbps DRM'ed file.

I really don't understand why the other three major labels fought with Apple so long in regards to DRM. Apple and EMI struck a DRM-free deal 6 months before Amazon announced everything DRM free.

Something fishy was going on.... collusion perhaps? The other three labels not allowing Apple to have 99 cent DRM free pricing, but allowing Amazon to have it?!?

[S_M_E]

I'll never use itunes nor buy an ipod/iphone that requires itunes.

[sandor]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

I'll never use itunes nor buy an ipod/iphone that requires itunes.

Just because?


Every once in a while i consider dropping google because they make is nigh unto impossible to *truly* delete something, and i worry about what could come of them scanning my emails and tracking my web usage. and i grow concerned that the "don't be evil" company controls so much of what i do.


then i wake up and remember that there are some things i keep under wraps and away from the internet just to keep them safe. for everything else google and apple and sage make it easier.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by sandor

Just because?

Because I don't want an ipod or iphone that forces me to use itunes and since they did that I don't want to use their SW either. My Philips mp3 player lets me use my choice of SW to manage my music. You can use it it if you want though.

I don't use google either, except for google maps sometimes.

[sandor]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

Because I don't want an ipod or iphone that forces me to use itunes and since they did that I don't want to use their SW either. My Philips mp3 player lets me use my choice of SW to manage my music. You can use it it if you want though.

I don't use google either, except for google maps sometimes.

Good enough, i have always been the same way with my bimmers - i love their hardware, no terribly fond of their software, so my first purchase is typically a better ECU.

[stanger89]

I'm still holding out for lossless downloads.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by sandor

i love their hardware, no terribly fond of their software

The ipod does have a lot of accessories and docks available but that's just not enough for me. I can find a better phone than the iphone, imo, too.

[stanger89]

Almost totally OT, but I've gotten used to JRMC and Squeezboxen/Squeezecenter for doling out my music needs, both offer up my whole library via dynamic playlists. I really want the same functionality in my car(s). I'm still at a loss for a solution. So far (unfortunately) a deck with iPod integration seems to be the closest match....

[sandor]

Originally Posted by stanger89

I'm still holding out for lossless downloads.

yeah, be it ALAC or FLAC.

but i would rather see 96+/24 bit audio downloads. but i'm happy that the "loudness" supporters are getting bitten in the ass.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by sandor

yeah, be it ALAC or FLAC.

but i would rather see 96+/24 bit audio downloads.

Lossless vs Lossy is easily a much bigger difference than "CD" vs "High Res" audio.

[sandor]

Originally Posted by stanger89

Lossless vs Lossy is easily a much bigger difference than "CD" vs "High Res" audio.

i dont know. when i have had the opportunity to hear studio tracks (digital or analog) versus the final audio on the CD (this is of course indy production) there was marked difference between the 24 bit audio and the 16 bit on the CD. sample rate didnt seem to have much of an effect on my ear, but the bit depth definitely did.


photography is my profession, and, much in the same way, color reproduction from a 16 bit per color channel CCD v. an 8 bit per channel is immensely different. but then i could introduce you to many a person who can still pick out kodachrome compared to any other slide film. my photography (retinal photography) is highly dependent on color reproduction.

in my head i relate image color depth and audio 16/24 bit in the same category - the ability to properly portray more individual sounds or colors. and i think this makes a big difference.

imaging resolution and audio sample rate (in my head) is of a lower concern. (i shoot with a 16 bit 6 MP CCD back that knocks the pants off a (same maker) 12 bit 11 MP back...which i shoot with also) ....but then i have a 1.2 MP back that can do things that neither of the big backs can, mostly due to the removal of the IR low pass filter = )

anywho.... hurrah for m&p of photography and learning from the ones that wrote the book... literally

http://www.amazon.com/Basic-Photogra.../dp/0240804058

cheers

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by sandor

i dont know. when i have had the opportunity to hear studio tracks (digital or analog) versus the final audio on the CD (this is of course indy production) there was marked difference between the 24 bit audio and the 16 bit on the CD. sample rate didnt seem to have much of an effect on my ear, but the bit depth definitely did.

I wouldn't trust that comparison, indie or not, lots of crap processing gets done when creating the final CD (loudness wars and all). I gave up on DVD-A after about 3 discs because I couldn't tell the difference at all.

photography is my profession, and, much in the same way, color reproduction from a 16 bit per color channel CCD v. an 8 bit per channel is immensely different.

What are you viewing on that can display 16bit/channel color?

in my head i relate image color depth and audio 16/24 bit in the same category - the ability to properly portray more individual sounds or colors. and i think this makes a big difference.

Bit depth in audio is pretty simple, the more bits the lower the quantization error. Quantization error sets the noise floor, which is about -6dB/bit. So CD audio has a noise floor (max theoretical SNR) of about -96dB. More bits will get you lower quantization error, but you'd be really hard pressed to have a room that can support that.