Some six months
after first announcing it, Microsoft and MTV have launched their URGE music service. The new service will be fairly similar to other subscription-based services that rely on Microsoft's PlayForSure DRM, and will offer 2 million songs, and have a monthly fee of $9.99, or $14.99 for a "to go" version that will work with PlaysForSure-compatible audio players. Of course, URGE will have one advantage that will inevitably help it make up for its late entry to the market: integration into the next version of Windows Media Player. That may cause some grumblings from the likes of Yahoo and Napster, though Microsoft has already settled with Real, so we suspect we're not going to hear them crying foul (besides, Real has been focusing most of its ire on Apple lately, something we think Microsoft will be perfectly happy to support).
posted May 15th 2006 9:16AM
I will be switching from my yahoo subscription service at the end of the month. This looks fantastic!
http://www.publish.com/article2/0,1895,1962246,00.asp
looks like the demise of iTunes...
Looks like it might be time to drop my zune. Especially if the rumors of Apple getting into the subscription market prove to be true.
Sweet...more choice for all non Ipod/Itunes users. Without subscription service...Itunes is so behind the curve for sure.
Wondering if there will be any eventual integration with the 360?
only if I get better than freakin 128 kbps
How is this any different than the 10+ other Playsforsure ripoff music sites? Extra money per month to send to a portable player? Why all the extra complication and contractual obligation? I have a feeling this will not topple itunes, as it's technically inferior in every way. Reminds me of how the movie industry keeps coming up with disposable DVDs. No one wants them, they all eventually end up in a landfill somewhere, but the movie industry keeps pushing them on us. I want to buy something and then have it be mine. For ONE PRICE. This service misses the mark in so many ways, but it's all intentional. DRM with less rights, more expensive for portable use, it all shows just how greedy the music industry, and Microsoft through proxy, really is. I smell total failure.
What makes this different than the other subscription services out there, except that it has a Vista-esque interface? While a number of people want subscriptions, the vast majority are not going that route.
Um... but it is shiny. Good for them.
The demise of iTunes? Only if it works with iPods. Keep dreaming.
However, it may be the first WiMP-based store to be moderately successful. And Apple really should add a subscription service to iTunes.
Looks okay, if you don't mind the nonsensical DRM. I'm sticking to iTunes, thank you very much.
Mind you, I'm obviously Apple slanted, which makes me correct.
(I'm not kidding).
HA! I give it 6 months. The interface is Shit, the price is not as good as napster (which is loosing money). This is basicly a day late a doller short. If it doesn;t work with iPod its over b4 it starts.
DS
http://reviews.cnet.com/MTV_Urge/4505-9240_7-31864344-2.html?tag=nav
Read the Cnet Review...there is lots that differentiates WMP 11 and the Urge integration. It seems like Urge does offer some coo new things. Also WMP 11 looks kick ass. I've always thought WMP was better and more robust than Itunes...but WMP 11 is leaps beyond any media player.
And remember WMP works with Windows Media Center...and therefor Xbox 360.
To number 4 who said
"While a number of people want subscriptions, the vast majority are not going that route."
That's only because the market leader Itunes...doesn't give their customers that option. But I assure you if Itunes had subscription service...everyone would take advantage of it. This is another case of "if it's not on Ipod/Itunes than it must suck"
UGly - looks like a mess compare to the iTunes
Does it offer podcast?
What really seperates it from the others?
What's with that hudge play button, am I blind?
i'm glad that Windows users are getting a nice looking alternative to some of the less than stellar programs out there.
but bob, seriously, "looks like the demise of iTunes"? uh, no. to beat iTunes, you have to beat the iPod and vise-versa. no one piece of software OR hardware will do that. now i wouldn't be in the least surprised if Windows & Mtv team up to launch a player, but they've got a long, crowded hill to climb.
This is only good if they support single song purchase. I mean I don't constantly listen to music everywhere i go and most of my friends don't either. Sure if i happen to hear a song or 2 that i like I won't mind buying it to keep (which is key to me) So for me I just don't see any benefit in a subscription based system of 9.99/14.99 a month when I'll listen to a few songs a few times during the month.
The only thing that Itunes is good for is this. Once i buy the song and load it onto my ipod, I don't ever have to worry about the song again. Meaning I don't have to run to my computer every 30 days to renew my subscription license. I know it won't kill me and it's only 5 mins. But the point is that I don't have to and my music still works on my player.
I guess if you plan on listening to more than 30 + new songs each month then it's worth it.
#8, please tell me you're kidding. I mean, surely, nobody's that horribly wrong about anything.
Why switch to some microsoft gimmick when itunes has everything layed out perfectly with low prices. its just another crappy napster with a hope that mtv will draw in the teenage audience. If they want the teenagers they will first have to make some ipod type device to take over the market. Right now that is impossible so good luck. I am not against any other company because the more competition is better for the consumer I just think they will have to do something bigger and better then $9.99 a month
Ok, so is this going to launch in beta today or Wednesday...this thing is turning into another Vista. Jeez... $150 bucks a year to put songs onto my moby dick blue.. what a waste of time.
To all people saying, "subscription is the only way to go..." "If itunes offered it people would do it..."
Read #11's comments...that's the view of the typical american consumer and the reason subscription services for music will not over take itunes.
I wonder if there is a way to erase the Apple firmware from an iPod and upload Media Player 11 connectivity.
Someone who can write that code will surely make a tidy fee.
Think of all those iPods in need on an update...
you can buy one song at a time. Its so funny how people start saying "you can't do this, can't do that" but they don't take to seconds to read the link or find out.
The player got good reviews and i'm sure it will do ok for everyone without an ipod. I mean the new iriver and toshiba players are badass and atleast they get this good interface to go along with them.
If they get this to work with ipods, then that will be cool. I'm sure a hack will come out.
'That may cause some grumblings from the likes of Yahoo and Napster, though Microsoft has already settled with Real...'
blah blah blah
never goona be as good, popular or cool as iPod and iTunes. period
"The player got good reviews and i'm sure it will do ok for everyone without an ipod."
Ummm ... who doesn't have an iPod these days?
I for one wont ever never in my life buy a single
DRM protected music file. Be it apple, microsoft and
whatnot. Fortunately my taste in music offers me a lot
of non drm alternatives. juno.co.uk - beatport.com - playwordandsound.net - traxsource.com to name a few. I feel sorry for those who get their kicks with shitty pop :-)
Who gets the problems with DRM, yup the ones who buy the music legally. Pirates have no problems. Use some sort of watermarking that can link a file to a person, but dont ever limit the use for the person that legally bought the music.
my 02
What everyone keeps forgetting about subscriptions is that as soon as you decide to stop playing, all your music is gone. All the money that you had been pouring into the service has left you with nothing to show for it. And when you want to purchase a song or album, that simply adds more money to what you're already paying. Jobs knows this and this is why the iTMS is the way it is, and doesn't offer subscriptions. What you buy is yours, with or without ever having to pay for anything ever again.
What the hell does MTV know about music anymore? If you told me that they were teaming up with Microsoft to allow for downloads of "Young losers whine on camera about other losers and how to best screw each other over" then yeah, but music?
Or VH1 where I can learn about Biggie and Tupac over and over (like anyone cared... ever)
But I seriously think MTV could have found someone to configure IIS for them and the Media Player 9/10 Encoder.
This is just the marrage of crap to Janus DRM. They just might have something though with America's music tastes. Idiots dialing up with AOL and downloading the latest track from "Talentless Whore", and loading it onto the cheapest 64MB DAP from Wal-mart. Why? because they can't wait a month to hear that song played every 15 minutes on a TV ad.
For this to be anything but dead on arrival will be ridiculious(which is what we are now in america so it might work). Microsoft will have to make it the default thing to come up in WMP11 for Vista & XP for it to make ANY money at all.
I'm pretty sure aligning ANYTHING with the RealPlayer, or Real in general, is a good way to automatically killy something before it begins.
Isn't Napster already integrated with Windows Media Player? It's there in the Online Stores menu with a ton of other places.
Meh.. here's what you do.
Get satellite radio, doesn't matter which one. Pick stations that offer real music, not the overprocessed crap that gets thrown out on top 40. Find bands you like. Buy their CDs. Check their websites first if they have them, buy direct. Rip CD to your favorite codec. Put on your favorite player.
Download-only music is just stupid. Anyone who pays for music that you can't do whatever you want with is just paying for obsolesence.
Man... all you Apple FREAKS grow up... And what ever happened to buying CDs! Am I the only one left who would rather pay $11 bucks and get a CD that I OWN!!! You can rip a CD to ANYTHING and do ANYTHING with the songs!!!! DRM is such a waste of time!!!
Besides... are people that shallow that they don't listen to the GOOD songs that bands make and only listen to the top 40 songs? If you are then you are missing out on 90% of the good music. Most bands write "RADIO SONGS" that don't really reflect the band but reflect the top 40 crap that kids listen to just to get a fan base.
Apple sucks... I can't believe how blind Apple followers are... open your mind... other companies make good stuff too... just because there is no Apple logo on it doesn't mean that it sucks...
I have a few MP3 players (bought over time) and none of them are iPods... but then again... I bet you Apple idiots dont know what and MP3 player is... just to let you know... the iPod IS an MP3 player... not the other way around.
Okay, look, Apple does not "suck". I'm no Apple apologist, even though I do own Apple stuff. This isn't about Apple, it's about being smart about what you spend your money on. If you don't like iPods, fine, but you can't change history and there are a lot of iPods out there and many, if not most people who own one, like them. Lots.
Building yet another download-only music service that offers yet another mind-numbing DRM "solution" is idiotic. MS just seems to be grasping at straws, chasing down markets that it already missed the boat on. It's chasing Apple for online music, it's chasing Google for search, etc. Maybe they should build a goddamn OS that's worth a damn, but I digress.
URGE is only good in one aspect and that is giving people another option. But it's still silly. Find bands you like, buy their CDs, rip the stuff and put it on whatever player you choose.
Why do people have to be so damn evangelical. You're not going to change anyone's opinion by saying things like "Apple Sucks" or "stupid MS fanboy", in fact using the term fanboy tends to invalidate your argument entirely.
I'm looking into my crystal ball and seeing this as being another copy cat floundering in mediocraty. It's immediately useless to Apple users, which is probably by design. It also begs the question of who at MTV is sleeping with who at Microsoft. Yet another reason for me to tune out MTV and anything it pushes. It's expensive (like all anti-ownership/subscription services) and doesn't work on an iPod. Are you seriously telling me that MTV is trying to get it's viewership to abandon their sheik iPods? LOL. What on EARTH are they thinking?
I suppose the thundering sound of failure when this falls flat will be another nail in the coffin for limited usage subscription services.
ha, Jason is the prime example of someone who will refuse to touch anything Apple because he knows when he does he will like it and that his windows shit will seem like AIDS in comparison.
go into an Apple Store with an open mind, pretend u know nothing then let them show what you can do with all their products the moment you get them home
re: TIM.
I love your enthusiasm for music but you're asking way too much from a consumer. The reason why services like iTunes are so popular is because they solve three issues:
1) The ease in which people can FIND music.
2) Instant gratification.
3) Integration of services and player.
To ask consumer to be actively involved in their purchasing habits the way you are suggesting is unrealistic. It's not that I dont' think that would be an ideal way to deal with things-- but it's just that. An ideal.
If you're into the subscription model, then the Feed and Informer playlist functionality sounds really great.
Plus the interface is clearly much better than WMP10, and the 'browsing by art' is surely more attractive for most users.
Neither of these affect me, I like spreadsheet-style music libraries and I don't buy enough new music to make a subscription model worthwhile so I'm happy enough with iTunes.
BUT: what is all this grumbling about DRM, wrt to iTunes? It's so easy to circumvent that any argument against it just makes you seem really lazy and / or a bit stupid. Yes of course it would be better without it, but then you wouldn't have any content. At least with iTunes you have a pretty nice DRM (compared to PlaysForSure - charging 50% more to put it onto a portable device, and cannot burn onto CDs at all), and you can get around it so easily it may as well not exist.
As for buying CDs - what is this, OldGrumpyMen.com? This is Engadget, for Christ's sake - digital distribution is the present, it's convenient, cheap, better for the environment, no browsing in stinking shops, no surly shop assistants...sometimes I wonder.
This doesn't have to be the "demise of iTunes". It just has to work.
Toyota doesn't develop a car to be the "demise of Honda". The market can support them both.
Grow up.
#28 (James) Buying music one song at a time is a TERRIBLE idea... If you want the music that bands make to be "made to sell" then fine... you will get music that all the other little kids out there want... Maybe you should just start buying Kids Bop albums :)
Personally I would much rather have bands make songs that they WANT to make... now you have the producers/lables out there looking at the iTunes and Napster stats saying... oh... X CRAPPY TRENDY TOP 40 SONG sold the best... so lets make 10 more of X CRAPPY TRENY TOP 40 SONGS...
NO THANKS!!! Get entire CDs!!! I don't care how convenient it is to download a single song... you are missing the point... it isn't about convience... it is about QUALITY... Pretty soon there wont be any difference in music... all the bands will be selling out trying to make music that sells... not good music.
The only reason I will not buy music through these online music solutions is audio quality. I haven't seen a legitimate one yet that encodes higher than 192kbps, and in most cases less than that. If I can't get at least a 256k encode, I'll buy the CD, thanks.
#26 (Tim) When I say Apple sucks it is because of the HUGE base of DUMB followers that they have... look at the posts on this message... how many Apple FANBOYS posted on here how this doesn't even compare to iTunes... have they used this new service? NO... will they? NO... why not? Cause Apple didn't tell them to...
Oh and I don't want to try to defend Microsoft but they tend to do almost everything they do better than most other companies... you gave your search example of them trying to catch up to google, yahoo, etc... I use MSN search because the results on it ARE more relevant to what I search for... Google has a terrible stanglehold on the search market... their search doesn't really return what you are searching for... it returns crap they they want to show you... Try some simple searches in both MSN and Google and I bet you will most often find what you are looking for with MSN first.
Don't get me wrong... I use google daily but it all goes to show the difference between perception and reality... there are TONS of better/cheaper MP3 players on the market... but any iPod owner wouldn't believe that... there are better search engines than google but most poeple dont know that... this may be a better service than iTunes but then again people don't care about what it better anymore... they just care about how cool they look using it... or how trendy the things are that they use.
I HATE APPLE! I would love for Urge to bury iTunes so Steve Jobs can go cry like the crybaby he is...
Gates up : Jobs Down! Long live MS!
Oh yea, any DRM sucks - buy CDs you fuckwits!
Notice how an article about WMP11 and Urge turns into a message thread about iTunes and iPods?
Enough said.
James, I'm down with digital distribution as long as its not lossy. I'm one of the few who thought the Valve/Steam/Half-Life two distribution method was amazing. But $.99/ track is not a deal in my mind. Not when it is substandard audio quality, and I don't actually own it (ie. I can resell it).
iPods are what trendy wendies use.. cant stand you ipod wearing, Jobs willy wanting fanboys.. leave the dominant MS alone.. Gates owns your small insignificant Apple co... Gates saved Apple when it was on the brink of extinction.. Gates gives more to charity than Jobs spends on crappy polar neck jumpers, (and that's millions) iPods are second rate devices.. no matter what is said. But "cool" wins out in many cases as is this one, your DRM'd up to the hilt crap quality iTunes downloads are hilarious.. they sound like crap.. up the ante in the quality stakes and I'll buy MP3's but 128, 192 is pathetic/ 256 is ok but not great..
Jobs, if you're reading this - if I ever see you, I'm gonna take your white earphones and wrap em round your neck for turning the world into Apples drones devoted to your second rate regime armed only with second rate devices!
Gates up : Jobs Down!
#32 & # 34 (Jason) I understand your point about pop music but fail to see its relevance to me. One of the reasons I buy so little music is because I am very picky about what my dollars go on.
I'm not sure I understand your direct link, that not buying much music = buying crap pop music. Not that I have a bias against pop music, by the way, that would be silly by definition.
Precisely because so much music is derivative, poorly-produced and full of zero talent no-hopers, I don't want a subscription. I also find that the vast majority of albums contain over 50% of filler. For the few that only 'work' if you have the whole album, or that contain more than 3 good songs, I'll buy the album from iTunes for cheaper than I can get it in the shops, with less hassle and easier to find - explain why this is a bad thing again?
The only person I agree with here is #33, Eric, who decries the quality of digital downloads - we want better quality!
PS: as for MSN search being better than Google, that is simply outrageous - any number of independent, qualitative, methodical trials have shown Google to be more efficient and accurate.
Where can you download
#39 (James) Check again about MSN... Seach yourself... don't go point at a study or survey... personally... when I am looking for products or companies or information about something I go to MSN... I get "quality" results in the listings... not results that just happen to have the most number of other google indexed pages linking to them... Googles formula makes them less accurate... you cannot account other pages linking to a page as a factor in search relevance... if a new company starts up and releases a product tomorrow I want to be able to see that in my search results... not just old crap that is outdated but heavily linked to...
Google is best for community based answers to questionsa and problems (google groups) but personally I have had problems finding things with googles web search... me personally... not a survey of people who like google....
As for the music... take something like Finger Eleven and their newest ablum... There are 2 songs on the album that are slow and "trendy" songs... they don't even come close to resembling the album as a whole... but those are the songs that hit the radio and are probably the most popular songs on iTunes from Finger Eleven... I really don't like those songs... they don't represent the bands other music, which is great... what happened to discovering music by listening to the other tracks on a CD? If you really LISTEN to music you can't make a I like this or I don't like this decision on a little audio byte sample of the song... you need to pop the CD in your car and listen to the whole thing... most of the time you will find yourself listening to the less popular music because it is better!
It sucks that things like iTunes just promote trendy and flood the music scene with CRAP.
Here is what i dont get... this site is pretty geeky, right? We all wanna spend a couple grand on our stereos. A lot of these computers reading this prolly have subs hooked up to them. A lot of the readers here prolly have nice car systems. Yet we are arguing which system to use to buy music that is inherently less high quality, and makes those systems sound worse then they should for the money.
Get up out of your chair, drive over to Target, and buy the damn CD. You'll get something with art, maybe some lyrics. You can take the hard plastic disk that comes with it to, you know, play those sames songs you'd buy from iTMS or Urge, but then, when you wanna go outside, you can eject the sucker and take it to your car! It'll sound better, and you'll get some songs that the artists took the time to write but some dick at the record company didn't wanna make in to a single.
Its great! Really! Try it!
If you haven't tried wmp 11 yet, http://www.mygigabeat.com/2006/05/windows-media-player-11-available-now.html, go download it and try it before making any irrelavant comments.
I've tried it and it works great. I think people will be suprised at how good it actually works. It's not a cluncky MS application.
What I find funny is that Apple had nothing to do with any of your lives unless you were an apple user, now that they were the first to come out with an online music store and an iPod that became popular. Everyone hates them, I dont get it because if you do not like the ipod or the ITMS don't use it and dont complain to others about how much you do not like it and cant stand steve jobs. I personally don't care about any of these online music stores and I dont know why the discussions always come out like this...
Even though I already subscribe to Rhapsody To Go *and* eMusic, I'll give this a test drive.
To those who can't get over the thought of "renting" music, it's only $15 a month. That's not much. Subscribing to URGE doesn't mean you can't buy a song on iTunes, or on URGE, or buy the CD. It augments what you've already got. After listening to something on Rhapsody for a while, I either buy the CD or move on.
Services like these are great for discovering and keeping up with music. (Judging from the many who think most albums are 90% filler, there's a lot of good music out there to be discovered. If you're listening to filler, you're listening to the wrong bands. It's that simple.) For active music purchasers -- and that's really who this service is for, let's be honest here -- I don't think this service is a substitute for buying music (CDs, vinyl).
eMusic is still the best out there, unless URGE is mind-blowing. No, eMusic doesn't have major label catalog, but it makes up for that with (a) MP3 format, (b) a great and growing roster of labels and (c) the best value. For those who aren't turned off by a music store that lacks Top 40 names, it can't be beat.
As for actually buying a song at URGE, no thanks. I'd rather rent the whole bunch. I don't mind renting DRM'd songs, but I'm not going to purchase one.
Again I see your point Jason, but I don't have the cash to buy new CDs on a whim just because they might be good. Digital distribution allows me to listen to at least a sample of the album before buying it, another advantage.
Online music stores propogates just as much good music as people are willing to listen to. They have playlists, suggested similar tracks, recommended music, guides to genres and artists...Surely some responsibility lies with the user?
Why are you so against it as a concept? There are no differences between an album from an online music store and an album from a store, except the ridiculously-easily circumvented DRM (at least in the case of iTunes) and the low bitrate.
But the advantages are numerous: convenience, recommendations, cost, environmental impact, choice...
I have tried all the major MP3 players, and have found the integration between iTunes and iPod the nicest to use for my needs. The iPod has one of the best sound qualities (as long as you invest in decent headphones). Its design is pleasing to me. Its interface is the easiest to use, and it does everything I want it to do. What MP3 player is better, and why? I am interested as I only want to buy the best and will upgrade if you offer compelling reasons. BTW, other codecs don't interest me, I consider AAC to be adequate.
The basic problem with people is that they just are blind followers. It is said that 95% of the world is following what the other 5% say or do.
When Steve Jobs says you don't need anything other than AAC and Mp3, claims that PowerPC is better than Intel chips then later replaces those chips with said Intel chips, Apple fans go nuts and accept this limitation and contradiction with joy.
When Sony releases a poorly built/ill equipped/overly expensive so called next generation machine, Sony fans go nuts and claim Kutaragi? is a genius.
The list goes on. Why don't you people just wake up and actually become good consumers. Don't buy products just because everyone else buys them, and certainly don't become a loyal brand whore.
Also, I believe buying a CD or an LP is much better than downloading a song. Remember when that guy with 10K worth of iTunes music got his HDD fried, what did Apple do. They told him to screw off. If you are going to pay for something, atleast pay for a real item, not bits of data.
What the nay-sayers say about the subscription model doesn't make sense... "People don't want a subscription model", "You have to give up the music once you stop paying, that sucks!", etc...
So, do you think Netflix sucks too? Netflix, you have to buy a subscription. You get all the movies you want, 3 at a time. You have to give them back when you stop paying for the service. The "to go" service is no different, except you aren't limited to 3 at a time and you don't have to mail them back. I can listen to 1 song a month, or 100....
Granted, it isn't for everyone, there are some people that only want to hear the same song or two (or 10) during a month. But to those of us that have a wide range of eclectic tastes, this is perfect.
Can anyone answer why, if the subscription model is so bad, Netflix is doing so well? The closest thing I hear to an answer is (hammed a bit by me), "Dude, I need my tunes. My music is who I am..".
#28 (greg) I own a Mac Mini that I use for testing websites in Safari... I bought it from an Apple store... You know what I saw? I bunch of Apple people getting paid to tell you how great Apple stuff is.
I NEVER use my Mac EVER... why? Because I have PCs that do EVERYTHING better.
#46 (james)
My currently media player is a Creative Labs Portable Media Center... it has a 30GB hard drive and holds EVERY album I have purchased legally and ripped to my Media Center PC... From my Xbox 360 I can listen to all of the music that is on my Media Center PC... I can burn any kind of CD I want with whatever music I want on it to take in my car... I can plug my PMC into my Xbox and listen to the music off of it and I can plug my PMC into an FM modulator in my car and listen to any of the music that is on it... Oh and by the way... I can also copy live TV recorded with my Media Center PC to my PMC and watch it on the go... Videos and photos too... pretty much any media on my computer can go right on my PMC (Creative Labs).
When I am in my basement working out I plug my PMC into a set of amplified PC speakers and listed to my music without head phones...
When I go out jogging I strap my Rio (used to be diamond then Sonic Blue) onto my arm and can't even tell its there... it has PERFECT sound quality and was made for runners... oh and it was only like $60 bucks... and it plays WMAs (my ripping codec of choice).
If you want to see GREAT integration go get a PMC and a Windows Media Center PC.
Point of the matter... name something that your iPod does that my Creative Labs player doesn't do. You can't... there are tons of things my PMC does that your iPod can't do... period... but hey... the iPod does look cool... and I guess that is what is important to most people...
My former boss (owner of a computer reseller) has an iPod nano... why cause his 13 year old daughter told him they are cool... that is TRUE... im not kidding... little does he know he could easily have gotten a cheaper player that was the same size or small WITH a screen... but I guess if Steve says that $99 bucks is a good deal for a player without a screen than that must be true.
Just wait... when the iPod video is finally released everyone is going to think that Apple invented portable video... but it probably wont be playing any WMV files.
People People, this discussion is getting insane.
For one, stop yelling at people to buy CD's if they want REAL music. WHO the hell are you to tell me what "real" music is to me? And youre speaking as if the ONLY thing available on the iTMS or URGE or anything like it is pop trash. Yes, theres plenty of it, but it not like its the ONLY thing available. WHat happens if I like a band or artist but have sampled the CD and only want maybe a track or 2 from the album. I should go out and pay $12-$15 for the entire thing, just so I can be DRM free? Or should i sign up for a subscription based service, so I only have the option to play it on my computer (as long as I'm paying the fee) and cant put it on my mp3 player if it happens to be an iPod? WHy not just pay the dollar or 2 for the music that I want, that i know i can keep, share with 4 others (legally), burn to cd, and put on my iPod, or any other mp3 player were i to circumvent the DRM with the many known ways of doing that? People saying that the iTunes model is trash, in favor of cd purchases, or a subscription model are talking from their anus. period.
About the audio quality from these online services - yes, it can, and probably should be better. But dammit people, you act like its like listening to a tape or 8track. Its not THAT BAD. What are we all expecting here? audiophile quality? 128kbps to MOST people is literally indistinguishable from the actual master coming out of the ProTools session in the studio in which it was created. Hell I bet if you polled everyone whoever bought music online if they even know what a bitrate is, they would NOT know. I wonder if alot of you even know how this type of compression works. I mean, yeah all the high frequencies suffer most(cymbal crashes, brush sounds, etc), but seriously, some of you people are acing like buying a song from iTunes is like buying a cheap karaoke version of a song, or a song thats been copied from tape to tape like 9 times. GET OVER IT.... these are services for CONSUMERS, not uber-analytical engadget readers. The majority of people who use this, like their iPod, cant tell the difference from a song in 128AAC or 24bit AIFF, and most of them are happily content with buying what they want, when they want, and not having to drive out to a store to get it, or pay every month to have an even more crippled version of their favorite tune.
i produce music and have a very good ear for compression artifcts and all, and i've even bought stuff from online music stores. Why, because its a buck, and it sounds GOOD ENOUGH.
end of story.
You know what would be great? If you could just go to a band's site, donate money to them directly, and download their DRM-free album right then and there. No RIAA. No middleman. Wouldn't that be perfect? But I guess that's a hopelessly utopian scenario.
ANother thing too, all yall people talking about integration with the 360 and the Windows MCE, assume that most people want this. I dont know that MOST want it. I dont want to sound like I'm stickign up for Apple or anything, cause i'm not, but no matter how much you try to discredit the iPod's capabilities and price, you all seem to be forgetting the iPod got where it is because of ease-of-use. The verical system. Consumers are dumb, dont think they are going to want to buy a non-iPod mp3 player,( even though some of them are great), and then go out to buy a CD from a store, import it, manage the album info and album art, buy music from Napster, URGE etc, continue to pay the subcription, make sure they have a PlaysForSure capable player... the list goes on. The reason iTunes/iPod is where it is today is because its simple, Buy an iPod, know (roughly) how many songs you can put on it, know that everytime you connect it to your computer it just transfers by itself, know that if you buy a song on iTunes it WILL work on your iPod, and you can keep it forever, burn it to CD, or do whatever else with it. iPods have a cool factor yes, but i think that they have somehwhat earned it. I mean, my freaking grandma has an iPod. And has put music on it herself.
All I'm saying is dont assume people want to be completely free with their music. As long as they can do with it what they need, they'll be happy, buy it, listen to it on the go, burn it.
ALot of you people on here get all randy at having something thats "different" from what the masses use, while you are kidding yourselves that being different is being easier/better. It is in alot of cases in life, but i'm not so sure it is when it comes to mp3 players.
#48 --- Maybe because people don't usually watch movies over and over agin like music,, You only watch a movie once or twice unless it's really really good; otherwise, it's a waste to buy. Not the same for music
#52 (SlammaJamma) Dude... once you have installed iTunes you have already made it more difficult that using almost any other MP3 player... If you run windows (like 95% of the people in the world) you can plug almost ANY MP3 player into and Sync it with WMP... PERIOD... No installations... no nothing... Don't kid yourself... there is nothing simple about the iPod... you may think it is "simple" because it really is only made to work with one service but again... that is your fault that you are not smart enough to realize that you do have a choice when it comes to this kind of stuff. Apple makes it hard to use your iPod with anything but iTunes... don't confuse that with "ease of use"... Don't try to tell other people that it is hard to use other MP3 players because it isn't... it's actually easier. Oh and I bet your grandma has a iPod because you told her to get one or bought one for her...
Oh and to the guy who was talking about managing your album art, etc... dude... have you used a computer this decade? If you really BUY your CDs and rip them it pulls album art and track info from CDDB... you don't have to manage that... unless of course your downloading your songs illegally and need to go though them and take out all the crap in them that the "pirates" put into the ID3 tags.
To me, there is nothing really exciting or innovative about URGE.
No way am I going back to spending $10-18 for a CD that has, maybe, 3-4 decent songs on it (there are always exceptions to this rule, sometimes the whole CD is good, sometimes there is only one good song). The record companies ripped us all off for years and if they had it their way, we would all still be buying CD's. Like it or not, iTunes legitimized pay for play music and forced the record companies to offer digital download alternatives.
Personally, I think it is great that we have freedom of choice and selection. For those of you who hate Apple/iPod, then don't buy it. For those of you who hate Windows/subscription services, then don't buy them. There will NEVER be a service/player that satisfies all consumers needs. It is called choice. I own both types of players (iPod/WMA) and they both have their strengths and weaknesses (although I do favor Apple since I use a Windows PC only when I have to).
Whateverrrr....URGE my ass! man this is another copy of iTunes. Crapp does M$ got better things to do do then copying business models and whatnot. I mean its all b.s they just wanna dominate everything. Google do this they throw LIVE. Fuck i hate Evil Empire like M$. O.S is crapp never throw a good products. shit whats with with M$. If Apple selling secondhand shoes here they come M.S gonna do it too! Bloody hell. I dont own iPod and not a mac fan boy. Just hate M$ for their greed!
RE Eric, ccunning, and James, Andrew, and SlammaJamma:
The itunes music stores offers downloads in aac format OR lossless format, which is half the size of a wav file but uses some kind of technology to keep all the data in tact. You can choose which format to download when you buy and they both cost the same $.99
You?d need broadband though because the files are a lot bigger. The lossless format is also supported by the ipod, and you can use itunes to re-encode a lossless format song into a high bitrate AAC or MP3 track to save space on your ipod or whatever. But what this means is that you can buy a full album on the itunes music store in lossless format, burn it to an audio CD that has exactly the same quality as a store bought cd would, and end up saving money in the process. Granted you don?t get fullsized album art which is a bummer, but when it?s in your car?s glove compartment on a hot day you don?t usually care. Or you could just buy the CD and rip it into the lossless format anyways?
I use limewire for most of my music listening pleasures, but the itunes store is helpful when there?s a song I want that is too obscure to show up on the filesharing networks. I like being able to find and download a song in less than a minute and stop worrying about it. It becomes part of my library and that?s that. If I really like a band I?ll buy the physical CD for myself or for a friend.
IMPO I think MS should stop futzing about with music and worry about getting vista up to snuff. And seriously, does MS have some aversion to proper user interfaces? Look at how little of the screen is actually used for the music store area.
Here's info on the lossless format:
Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Lossless
Article by an audiophile: http://aroundcny.com/Technofile/texts/mac060204.html
I purchase music via CDs primarily for quality and ownership of music that does not evaporate if I chose to stop a subscription service. And considering online services don't offer most the music I listen to, it's a moot point.
If you're listening to music on a portable player with tiny bud headphones, the difference between 128 and AIFF won't be noticeable. But I listen to a good deal of jazz played through my stereo at home. And in this case the difference is clearly noticeable, even considering I'm not an audiophile.
Of course the time will come when nearly all music is available online at higher quality. On that day the trumpets shall echo forth in the name of subscription.
#56 & 57 (UGE and Max A.) It is simple minded to think that MS is taking time away from Vista to work on URGE... come on... they are the largest and most successful software company in the world... I'm sure they are not pulling programmers off of the Vista coding to work on URGE... Please...
Oh and the size of the store has nothing to do with Microsoft... in the web world you have to design for the lowest common denominator... URGE is just a web page being displayed through WMP... you can change the default service to Napster or any other online music service... except iTunes...
And Max A... that is called stealing... Why would you even bother reading this article if you just steal all your music?
I second what James said in #30: DRM is so bloody easy to get around that it's a non-issue. It may as well not exist.
So, that being out of the way, I prefer a single-purchase model to a subscription model for one very obvious reason:
The second your subscription runs out, your music is *gone*. You've suddenly lost the right to listen to it (unless you've taken the couple minutes to circumvent the DRM), which is ridiculous; the multibillion-dollar record industry was built on decades sales of single albums with *no* DRM whatsoever attached and certainly no threats of suddenly taking your music away for not continuing to pay.
And as for the person who argued that iTunes and similar music stores encourages sales of only the most popular music: that's only true if you restrict yourself to the very front few pages. It takes maybe a few clicks to get to some comparatively obscure and often really intriguing and good music that you otherwise wouldn't have known about. Your argument proves nothing but your own lack of effort.
Apple has indeed dominated the market for digital music and MP3 players, but IMHO they did so by creating products that appealed to a large number of consumers. If the closed iPod-iTunes scheme feels too restrictive for you, the market is literally flooded with alternatives for you to choose from. Vote with your dollar. Do whatever you want, because nobody is stopping you. There's no reason to complain when choice is precisely what brought the major players in digital music (pun intended) where they are now.
"Services like these are great for discovering and keeping up with music. (Judging from the many who think most albums are 90% filler, there's a lot of good music out there to be discovered. If you're listening to filler, you're listening to the wrong bands. It's that simple.) For active music purchasers -- and that's really who this service is for, let's be honest here -- I don't think this service is a substitute for buying music (CDs, vinyl)."
So you're going to pay twice to listen to music? I'm an "active music purchaser," who (used to) enjoy listening to lots of music and searching for new groups, etc. However, as much of a pain the music industry is making the act of "enjoying" music, I've mostly stopped listening to music altogether and I'll be damned if they're going to make money off of me monthly just so I can listen to decent stuff and STILL have to go out and buy a CD that might also be DRM'ed up the *** and tries to prevent me from ripping it or making a backup copy (which is crucial for rare/imported discs).
Personally, I'd rather (and DO) spend the $10/mo supporting my local public radio station where I still have the chance of listening to some good/interesting stuff while not feeding more money than necessary to the music industry's attempt to continue to sticking it to my backside. When it comes to discovering new artists otherwise, I now depend on Amazon's suggestions and "...also bought..." lists or other music networking/relationship sites for clues. I'll then find a free preview of the album and but if I like it.
The music industry is trying soooo unbelievably hard to make listening to music an (even more) expensive pain in the ass. Don't even get me started on Ticketmaster...$7 ticket, $15 in fees...OMFG.
Personally I can't stand the MP3 player revolution... Seeing kids walking around in groups with other kids and seeing a little pair of white headphones in each kids ears makes me wonder... do kids even socialize with each other anymore???? What happended to talking to your friends on the bus and walking thru the hall like we did when we were kids? Not to mention kids that text each other all the time... I know people who have kids who text there friends from their cell phones ALL the time... what ever happened to calling them and talking to them on the phone? If you both have cell phones just CALL each other... I'm sure kids in this generation are really going to lack certain people skills...
I URGE you do buy this...
The points being made are getting a bit out of control (big surprise, I know). It seems that there is this idea that only morons who don't have the facts buy iPods. Well, I have the facts and I still voted iPod. Why? It is an elegant, attractive, and fully-integrated solution. Coming to this conclusion requires you keep a few points in mind:
1) iPod and iTunes are not separate in Apple's eyes. You can't really talk about one without the other. iPod+iTunes IS the whole product. Yes, you technically can use one without the other but this is NOT what Apple ever intended. This will naturally mean that trying to use one without the other is a pain in the ass. So saying that it's easier to use a non-Apple player with non-apple software is equivalent to telling me the sun will come up tomorrow. It's just like Apple operating systems vs. Apple hardware. You get both at the same time, not one or the other.
2) iTunes and the iTunes Music Store ARE separable entities. For example, I use iTunes exclusively but I do NOT buy tracks from the iTunes Music Store (because of the DRM). However, you cannot fool yourself into thinking the iTunes Music Store is anything other than LANDMARK. It is completely responsible for the extended online purchase options we have to today. It showed the music industry that a profit could be made while not inflating piracy beyond it's current state.
3) I, in fact, am very well aware of competing mp3 players to the iPod. But my main issue is integration between the player and the software used to manage my music library on my computer. I want to put a CD in my computer have *magic* happen. I never want to have to even think about music management. I want my music to show up on my player automatically. I want to open my music software and type what I'm looking for, and have it show up. If I want to send somebody a track I want to be able to pull it straight from the playlist to the desktop. iPod+iTunes does this wonderfully. Until recently such integration has been absent or severely lacking in the non-iPod+iTunes world.
4) I appreciate design and elegance. I want my music player to be as small as possible and as intuitive as possible. I don't want it to feel clunky. I don't want it to do a bunch of things I don't need or want.
5) I will never pay for a music subscription. Ever. I like owning things. (Thus no DRM tracks either, as I said before). Many people feel this way, usually try music enthusiasts. Now iTunes does not currently offer a subscription, but does anyone really think that if the demand seems to call for it that Apple won't simply "flick a switch" and offer subscriptions? Right now *most* people want to buy, not rent, so Apple is concentrating on that.
So, iPod+iTunes meets these criteria well. REALLY well. Maybe now some player+WMP 11 combination matches this, but I fail to see how finally doing something as WELL as the MARKET LEADER is anything to get excited about.
You can hate because you only like one half of the iPod+iTunes puzzle. If you like iPods but hate iTunes or like iTunes and hate iPods you are probably frustrated at the inability of one half of the equation to play well with non-Apple products. That's fine, but it's not really a reason iPods or iTunes "suck". Again, there is only one product here: iPod+iTunes. Hating iPods because of this is like hating your car because you can't get the back half to be a Camry and the front half to be an Accord.
However, bitching because Apple has put together a completely integrated solution (elegant software that goes with the elegant hardware) is just plain ignorant. If you don't like iTunes OR the iPod, get a different player+software combo. Simple.
This is my idea of DRM: the G in Urge is the perfect copy of the QuickTime logo.
For everyone who does appreciate their iPod+iTunes, and is interested in a subscription model, checkout pandora.com which works on both Windows and Mac... for FREE!
Does what subscription sites do best (find new music based on your tastes) with the same lossy output, but doesn't actually download to your harddrive (so no you can't put it on your iPod)
For owners of Apple's Airport Express wireless product, you can use Airfoil (for Mac and now in beta for Windows) to transmit Pandora's output from your browser of choice, to any place in your wireless network (or multiple airport's).
Tell me this isn't way better than just downloading subscriptions for $15/month... Essentially like having XM at home for now't!
The URGE website says it will launch on May 17th. What is this posting about and what are all these comments about? Who saw the damn interface to say it is better than itunes or not ?
-Go Open or stay Apple
I work at home, and as such I'm rarely in the car for long periods of time.
I have a subscription to Napster To Go.
I get to listen to pretty much any music I want, whenever I want, and if I'm out, either for walking the dog, working out, working in the yard, whatever, I can still listen to that same music.
It would take me about 10 years at $15/month in order to get even close to the amount of music I'm able to listen to. Then while I'd own it forever, I wouldn't be able to listen to anything else...
If I really like something and find myself listening to it over and over, I'll either buy the cd or purchase it.
$15 is so(only 10 for no mobile solution) small and meaningless over the course of a month that it's effectively free.
$0.50/day, to always have something new on that I'd never be able to find in a million years.
The biggest downfall to me in Napster is no really good recommendation system, at least not one that doesn't get me caught in a cycle.
So if Urge has a pretty good system, I'll simply switch over to their system. All the napster songs i've bought (maybe 2 or 3 albums worth in the past two years) will still work fine, and i'll be able to continue my habits.
If you're not at a computer most of the day, or you're taste in music isn't varied much, or you purchased an ipod, then the subscription model isn't for you.
But for me it's beyond perfect.
I don't like DRM and never buy singles. However, there comes a time when one wants to quickly download a song - the pre-release of Dani California and Speed of Sound are examples that spring to mind. However, I like to own the music and not just own the rights to a digital file - I like a physical CD with the album booklet. Music is an experience - it's about putting the vinyl in your record player or CD in the CD player and I think digitally downloading loses some of the preciousness of this. You don't have to care for a download in the same way.
The quality is also too low for these files to justify the price when it's so close to the price of the physical CDs at higher quality. There is also the matter of corruption of - if this happens there is no way to download again - you have to have backed up.
The convenience and price of these services and excellent but for me no service will ever replace a physical CD. I believe the subscription model will not work for me. I want to own my music - not rent it.
why do they even try to go up against iTunes.. but i do like that blue-ish black-ish face
Windows Media Player was leaked in beta form yesterday.
You can get it now!
Google it.
This whole discussion gives me the Urge to Wii - thanks #39 that rant was priceless!
I am so happy to see MS & MTV in bed together! Good things will come of this I am sure.
I only buy music from allofmp3.com take that RIAA. I bought my girlfriend a Creative Muvo TX FM. She likes it and I thought it would work with subscription services but apparently it doesn't. That is apparently a hardware issue. If these subscription services had no limits on the devices they'd work on, meaning subscribe to Urge and it works on EVERYTHING BUT IPODS, it could take off. Someone will sync their player to their computer at some point right? So why make the management of these files hardware based. Once you sync it up the songs phone home and if the subscription is cancelled the songs get removed.
OK, to all the ppl who are like "what does MTV know about music". You're stupid. Sorry, but this Viacom. Not just MTV, but ALL OF VIACOM. And they have access to just about every song and music video ever made. And they have TONS of music specific television programs as well as other special interest programming, and they have a pricing plan that allows 99c per song selling (anyone who thinks that they're not going to stick with 99c/song while Apple still has market dominance is out of their mind) as well as subscription service. And it's got a catchy name and VERY slick integration into WMP11 (I've been testing out the beta all day and I'm very impressed with it). So anyone who doesn't see this as a very serious bid of competition for the iTMS and doesn't welcome it (whether you've been waiting for a REAL windows music service or you're an iTunes user and finally see something that will force Apple to actually compete with someone and drop prices/increase service/etc) is on crack.
And this my personal opinion, but I've also always thought that WMP10 was better than iTunes 5/6 for various reasons (I've used both extensively for a time). WMP11 looks even better (fixes almost all of my problems with WMP10 so far). So I'm excited for it.
And really, nothing is going to be the death of anything. Both of the services/brands/solutions will exist in the market and they will compete, and somehow the world will go on.
Wow, Aqua-like interface !
Well well. We will see whether this goes or not. Too me it looks like Songbird. The subscribtion-model, hum... I don't know. It may be good but do they support song purchase? I don't know, but for me MTV feels just so 90's, so outdated. Everything they do get a touch of boringness. Maybe it's just me. Anyhow, MTV and Microsoft got a high hill to climb with this one.
...#77
iTunes it a REAL Windows Music service... URGE to me looks like any other NapsterClone out there. We well see if it flys :)
This is the first thing Microsoft has done in this area which makes any kind of sense. Took 'em long enough. How many meetings, I wonder, did it take to realize that integration is important, and then how many more to plan to prepare to get ready to do something? It will be interesting to see how it fares.
Jason, you need to get a life and let people choose what they like for themselves. No one answers to you, no one asks you, and your self-important attitude indicates it should stay that way. Do you think people enjoy it when you relate to them in this fashion? It's not going to get you anywhere. It's really quite sad. Worse than the "fanboys" you seem to be insane over.
Go on Microsoft - This WMP11 just shows all those MS haters that MS can come out with something that rips Apple limb from limb, functionality and style all in this perfectly designed peice of software, its a masterpiece, the holy grail of media players (ok, i think i'm going a bit too far with this, but u get the point)
subscription services are what they are. it's not as if anyone is going to completely replace their music buying habits with Urge or Rhapsody or any of the others. at the end of the day, it is better to own the CD. however, at 9.99 or 14.99 or whatever a month, it's about like saying for the price of one CD a month (a low number for me) you can preview 85% of the whole world of music you might think about buying. it's not a rip off, it's not a panacea. in this light, Urge is a perfectly fine offering.
I am trying out the free trial now and I must say that I am at least impressed that they are offering downloads at 192kbps.... sure beats 128kbps. Yes, I agree DRM sux, but it is slowly becoming a fact of life. The interface is a little sluggish, but I expect that may change as the software exits beta. The one neat thing is you can watch music videos without even joining the service...
You know, the thing that bugs me about people disagreeing with the subscription model is that purchasing/downloading is available with every subscription service. If you purchase and cancel your subcription, you can still listen to your WMVs. It works the exact same way as iTunes except you have a greater opportunity to explore more bands.
I've already test-driven the new URGE integrated with Windows Media Player. I was excited, but now I'm far from impressed. I've only been able to download one song so far without the player gettin frozen. And, it's almost impossible to download an album simultaneously. Not a fan.
am i the only one that hates Itunes? lol
This interface is pretty slick. Could be faster but its beta. It already kicks YME & Napsters ass tho. those clients REALLY suck. imho
the thing is that people will gladly fork over $12.95 a month to XM or sirus for satellite radio subscription but then complain that URGE or Rhapsody are pointless and you lose the music when you cancel. So what's the difference between that and satellite radio? if there's music you truly love, then you can buy that for keeps on a CD. but a subscription music service just opens up a whole wide world of music that you could never afford before. for example, i transfered a 145 song playlist of music specifically from 1989-1997 alternative. it's so great to hear all that awesome music again that i remember from high school and college. but i didn't have to buy literally 60 albums to get those 145 songs. heck, i didn't even have to spend $145 to buy each track from itunes. there are a couple of artists in that playlist that i would like to buy their CDs for keeps, but not nearly all of them. so i'll buy those 2-3 CDs and continue to subscribe so i can listen to anything i want for about 50 cents a day.
i just don't see what is so wrong with a subscription service. i have never liked pop music and hate top 40 music so i also don't see that subscription only offers "crap". there's probably 85% of all music in circulation right now on these subscription services including very obscure tracks.