Steve Jobs and EMI present "an exciting new digital offering" -- live!
By Thomas Ricker 
posted Apr 2nd 2007 7:58AM
posted Apr 2nd 2007 7:58AM
7:58 We just joined the conference call. Hey, was that the sound of a black, mock turtle neck?
8:04 Time for the show to start. Hello, Steve, Eric, anybody there?
8:06 Reader tip just in (thanks Chris O). Looking at page source from the webcast (which has yet to start) we see the following:
slide text 1: Value for money Choice Ease of Use
slide text 2: digital consumers stated that they agreed fully or somewhat with the statement "it is important to be able to transfer files between devices"
slide text 3: DRM Free -- Superior sound quality
slide text 4: DRM free tracks at twice the sound quality or Standard sound quality tracks with DRM. DRM free complete albums at twice the sound quality. Ability to upgrade already purchased tracks and albums. DRM free music videos
Seems pretty clear which way this is heading!
8:11 Webcast has started. Live music now playing from The Good, the Bad, and the Queen, not the remaining members of the Beatles. Couldn't they have saved this for the end?
8:16 Jeebus, they just started another song.
8:21 Press release out:
EMI Music launches DRM-free superior sound quality downloads across its entire digital repertoire.
Apple's iTunes store to be the first online music store to sell EMI's new downloads
January tests showed a 10:1 preference for higher quality tracks without DRM. New Premium tracks sold at price premium.
Premium quality will sit along side standard offerings.
8:28 First partner to support new DRM-free EMI music will be iTunes.
8:29 Steve Jobs now entering stage. Applause, tears. The next big step forward -- the move to completely DRM-free music. EMI is first, entire catalog available DRM-free -- globally -- in May.
8:30 Sounds like Steve is reading from a stack of cards -- this is not his normal polished delivery. Apple testing confirms that people will pay more for higher quality music that is interoperable across devices. 128-bit AAC encoding not good enough for audiophiles. Increases in storage enable higher audio quality tracks on devices. New versions of songs and albums are DRM-free and 256kbps AAC encoded for $1.29 per song. That extra $0.30 gives users DRM-free interoperability and superior quality. It's not a price increase but an additional iTunes product.
Previously purchased EMI songs can be upgrade for $0.30 per song.
DRM-free albums will be priced at the same price (but higher quality) as current, DRM-crippled albums.
Apple will reach out to other labels starting today to give them the same deal. Steve expects 50% of all tracks to be DRM-free by end of the year! That's 2.5 of the 5 million tracks currently on the site.
Steve opines: Some doubted our sincerity to break the iTunes bond between the store and iPod player. Hopefully, people can see that Apple is only concerned with doing the right thing for the customer.
8:35 Q&A has begun.
Q: When are the Beatles tracks going to be online?
Steve: "I want to know that too." chuckles.
Eric: "we're working on it, hopefully soon."
Regarding Nordic consumer groups, Steve says they are not offering anything new today that's not already available on DRM-free CDs.
Q: Is this a green light for piracy?
Eric: no, we take the view that we have to "trust consumers." Some will disappoint us. The idea is to give them the best music experience to grow sales and not diminish them.
EMI confident this will grow their sales. 1/4 of all sales digital by 2010. Hard to predict, but they think this will make their music more accessible to promote sales.
Q: Have talks begun with other majors?
Steve: EMI is pioneering something that will probably become very popular. Can't comment on any discussions. Again, Steve points out that CDs ship with DRM. Sony tried it... it didn't work.
Q: Are some of the majors being more difficult, if so, who?
Steve: I don't want to go into it, there are always leaders. Customers will love it, they get what they want. Music companies make more money by offering more value.
Q: Will DRM now be removed from videos such as Disney's where you (Steve) has a say?
Steve: I knew I was going to get that question today. Video is different, they never distributed 90% of their wares DRM free like music companies. So he doesn't hold the two in parallel.
Q: Now that the link between iPod and iTunes is broken, will there be a fall in sales?
Steve: No -- no link broken. You can already rip CDs and put songs on any player you want. Apple's success is based on having the best and easiest to use music store and players -- they've never felt any differently.
Q: Which other digital retailers has EMI spoken too?
Eric: We hope they all take this on. (avoids question)
Q: What's the point of keeping DRM on $0.99 tracks?
Steve: We don't want to raise prices on anybody. We'll continue what we started and offer more value for the money without taking anything away. Consumers make the choice.
Eric: Not everybody cares about interoperability or sound quality.
Q: Will EMI dictate pricing to other on-line music stores?
Eric: EMI sets the wholesale price, not the retail price. So prices may vary by other on-line music services.
8:59 That's it, a new age has begun! Well, in May anyway.
8:16 Jeebus, they just started another song.
8:21 Press release out:
EMI Music launches DRM-free superior sound quality downloads across its entire digital repertoire.
Apple's iTunes store to be the first online music store to sell EMI's new downloads
January tests showed a 10:1 preference for higher quality tracks without DRM. New Premium tracks sold at price premium.
Premium quality will sit along side standard offerings.
8:28 First partner to support new DRM-free EMI music will be iTunes.
8:29 Steve Jobs now entering stage. Applause, tears. The next big step forward -- the move to completely DRM-free music. EMI is first, entire catalog available DRM-free -- globally -- in May.
8:30 Sounds like Steve is reading from a stack of cards -- this is not his normal polished delivery. Apple testing confirms that people will pay more for higher quality music that is interoperable across devices. 128-bit AAC encoding not good enough for audiophiles. Increases in storage enable higher audio quality tracks on devices. New versions of songs and albums are DRM-free and 256kbps AAC encoded for $1.29 per song. That extra $0.30 gives users DRM-free interoperability and superior quality. It's not a price increase but an additional iTunes product.
Previously purchased EMI songs can be upgrade for $0.30 per song.
DRM-free albums will be priced at the same price (but higher quality) as current, DRM-crippled albums.
Apple will reach out to other labels starting today to give them the same deal. Steve expects 50% of all tracks to be DRM-free by end of the year! That's 2.5 of the 5 million tracks currently on the site.
Steve opines: Some doubted our sincerity to break the iTunes bond between the store and iPod player. Hopefully, people can see that Apple is only concerned with doing the right thing for the customer.
8:35 Q&A has begun.
Q: When are the Beatles tracks going to be online?
Steve: "I want to know that too." chuckles.
Eric: "we're working on it, hopefully soon."
Regarding Nordic consumer groups, Steve says they are not offering anything new today that's not already available on DRM-free CDs.
Q: Is this a green light for piracy?
Eric: no, we take the view that we have to "trust consumers." Some will disappoint us. The idea is to give them the best music experience to grow sales and not diminish them.
EMI confident this will grow their sales. 1/4 of all sales digital by 2010. Hard to predict, but they think this will make their music more accessible to promote sales.
Q: Have talks begun with other majors?
Steve: EMI is pioneering something that will probably become very popular. Can't comment on any discussions. Again, Steve points out that CDs ship with DRM. Sony tried it... it didn't work.
Q: Are some of the majors being more difficult, if so, who?
Steve: I don't want to go into it, there are always leaders. Customers will love it, they get what they want. Music companies make more money by offering more value.
Q: Will DRM now be removed from videos such as Disney's where you (Steve) has a say?
Steve: I knew I was going to get that question today. Video is different, they never distributed 90% of their wares DRM free like music companies. So he doesn't hold the two in parallel.
Q: Now that the link between iPod and iTunes is broken, will there be a fall in sales?
Steve: No -- no link broken. You can already rip CDs and put songs on any player you want. Apple's success is based on having the best and easiest to use music store and players -- they've never felt any differently.
Q: Which other digital retailers has EMI spoken too?
Eric: We hope they all take this on. (avoids question)
Q: What's the point of keeping DRM on $0.99 tracks?
Steve: We don't want to raise prices on anybody. We'll continue what we started and offer more value for the money without taking anything away. Consumers make the choice.
Eric: Not everybody cares about interoperability or sound quality.
Q: Will EMI dictate pricing to other on-line music stores?
Eric: EMI sets the wholesale price, not the retail price. So prices may vary by other on-line music services.
8:59 That's it, a new age has begun! Well, in May anyway.
Do I hear DRM-free music?
yes fdezjose, you do... and technicaly... twice as well.
My BitTorrent Engine is ready to fire on full cylinder... Demonoid and Piratebay, be ready for the new era of EMI Music.
Surely someone should be ripping these awful tracks from the press conference feed?
Sweet, I'm glad someone's going to make them pay for deciding that they don't care about who has their music and is distributing it.
Everything has been said allready here:-D
http://www.emigroup.com/Press/2007/press18.htm
Press release:
EMI Music launches DRM-free superior sound quality downloads across its entire digital repertoire
Apple's iTunes store to be the first online music store to sell EMI's new downloads
Slides are available here
http://www.emigroup.com/NR/rdonlyres/87F9CEF1-E658-4A0F-B2B8-DB56BCEFC3C1/0/EMI2Aprilpressconferenceslides.pdf
It is about DRM free music tracks and videos.
The Good, the Bad, and the Queen sound pretty good, i'll have to look into them and I'll be happy to pay for it.
Seems like the real kicker though is that they will charge a premium for DRM free tracks.
...but not charging a premium for full album purchases! I think I missed format, but they do say it can be played on any player... is that mp3?
here's the address for the webstream, if anyone wants it. windows media
http://mfile.akamai.com/7135/live/reflector:42929.asx?bkup=42930
How does being DRM-free make it sound better? Is this some sort of weird promotional trick to somehow FUD consumers into thinking DRM'd music "sounds worse"?
Look, I'm all for hating DRM for what it is. But once you start tossing lies into the mix, that's where I've got an objection. I could easily have a lossless CD rip with DRM - just shoving MS DRM isn't going to hurt the sound quality.
And, yeah, the 30 cents more a track thing does suck. If you're going to pull that stunt, it needs to be lossless, not just a higher bitrate.
"How does being DRM-free make it sound better? Is this some sort of weird promotional trick to somehow FUD consumers into thinking DRM'd music "sounds worse"?"
If you had waited until the webcast was over before posting, or even just 3 more minutes, you would have gotten your answer:
"*256kbps* DRM-free tracks"
"And, yeah, the 30 cents more a track thing does suck. If you're going to pull that stunt, it needs to be lossless, not just a higher bitrate."
First of all, 256 AAC sounds even better than a 256 MP3 according to "audiophiles" (after all, AAC was developed long after MP3 and stands for Advanced Audio Coding) and I personally can't tell the difference between a 256 MP3 and the CD I ripped it from to begin with. Also, from the webcast:
"Complete albums from EMI Music artists purchased on the iTunes Store will automatically be sold at the higher sound quality and DRM-free, with no change in the price."
Apple's iTunes Store (www.itunes.com) is the first online music store to receive EMI's new premium downloads. Apple has announced that iTunes will make individual AAC format tracks available from EMI artists at twice the sound quality of existing downloads, with their DRM removed, at a price of $1.29/€1.29/£0.99. iTunes will continue to offer consumers the ability to pay $0.99/€0.99/£0.79 for standard sound quality tracks with DRM still applied. Complete albums from EMI Music artists purchased on the iTunes Store will automatically be sold at the higher sound quality and DRM-free, with no change in the price. Consumers who have already purchased standard tracks or albums with DRM will be able to upgrade their digital music for $0.30/€0.30/£0.20 per track. All EMI music videos will also be available on the iTunes Store DRM-free with no change in price.
If they're charging more than $.99 per track I just won't buy it online... any more and matches or exceed the cost of a physical CD (without DRM).
I think a $1 is even too much for one song. $1.30?
Also the songs won't be in the MP3 or another open standard format. I think I'll wait until the songs are $1 and in a format like MP3. At least they got the sound quality right.
You do realize that AAC is an open format, right? It is only the FairPlay wrapper that Apple puts around the files that make them proprietary in any sense...
That's pretty stupid man.
AAC is part of the MPEG4 spec: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Audio_Coding
You can play back AAC on pretty much everything these days. Hell, my phone can play it. Even the Zune can do AAC
"premium" price... i'll pay a permium price for a cd thank you very much.
just when i thought a major label was finally getting it. doh. they'll never learn.
256kbs! 99p per song...or 30cents more.
AAC format, not MP3 or OGG!
Wow, Emi's press release states that full DRM-Free album's will continue to be available at the same price.
Music videos are also DRM free.
Existing purchases can also be upgraded to DRM free for $0.3.
This is something fantastic.
EMI. Thank you so much.
Watermark all you want, I don't care caus eI don't share.
But now I can just cut out HMV Virgin and all from the loop.
I can only pray that TV shows are next.
Wow wow wow
Why should higher quality cost more? Or should we say medium quality?
And why not just make them lossless?
But DRM-free is very nice.
Because lossless is HUGE. 25+ MB per track. I don't know about you, but my laptop, with its paltry 60 GB drive, can't exactly hold many of those tracks. And I don't think Apple, as large as it is growing, could afford enough bandwidth or storage for multiple Terrabytes of storage for this music (don't forget about redundant storage and servers, so we have multiple copies of the libraries). Plus, imagine you have Dial-Up or DSL. Oi, that would make music downloading suck.
I agree, lossless music downloads would be optimal, but at this point, it's not too feasible.
Well I welcome this. This is a huge move for a major label like EMI, and must be seen as the first step in removing DRM from all downloads - others will surely follow.
AAC is as open as MP3, MP3 ist just more commonly used mainly due to P2P Software.
However iTunes offers you to convert AAC Files into MP3.
What I would have liked to see were Lossless Files so I remain with buying CDs for Albums and the iTunes Store for individual Tracks.
when I said I wanted an open standard format, I guess I really meant to say that I wanted a format that wasn't proprietary. So that means I don't want AAC or WMV. I'd like my music in MP3 or OGG or another open non-proprietary format. I don't want to have to convert the files into that format. I want to be able to but the music in that format to begin with.
AAC and MP3 are both part of the MPEG-2 standard AAC is open its just not as widely used for the reason I wrote above.
Wow you guys will bitch about anything. Normal tracks cost the same, you're paying more based on the fact that you can use them however you want to, and an album still costs the same $9.99 and you STILL complain... I'm sure they could make the music free and you'd still complain that they aren't paying you to listen to it cuz its crappy music anyways, but you'll still download it.
Also, a higher quality track = uses more storage space on their server and uses more of their bandwidth to send to you coupled with the fact that they now have TWO copies of the same EMI content, one at standard quality and one at higher quality, and they should eat this cost?
The "Big Deal" about this is that, once again, companies are trending towards offering people with money something to pay for. This won't change the minds of the open source folks, or the "free music" pirates, or anyone that thought the old $.99 was too expensive.
For "folks with money", they're saying,"Get something twice as good for just a little more". And, if you already have it, pay a bit to upgrade it to a higher quality and hear what you've been missing on your HIGH quality equipment.
@Jaxim: Proprietary? I do not think you know the meaning...
Advanced Audio Coding (AAC) is MPEG-4 AAC
From the Wikipedia article mentioned above: "AAC was developed with the cooperation and contributions of companies including Dolby, Fraunhofer (FhG), AT&T, Sony and Nokia, and was officially declared an international standard by the Moving Pictures Experts Group in April 1997."
Apple, Microsoft, Pioneer, Samsung, Sony... the list goes on and on. Exactly how is that proprietary?
Now, Apple Lossless Codec (ALC) is proprietary! But it's also much smaller than a WAV or an AIFF. So, if Apple decided to start offering ALCs would you complain about that being a proprietary format, even though it's lossless and could be converted to numerous different formats from there?
"I really meant to say that I wanted a format that wasn't proprietary."
AAC is as proprietary as MP3... which is to say it's not. Anyone that pays the license fee can play it back.
Now, if what you MEANT to say was that you wanted .MP3 so that it could play back on some old hardware, that IS a valid complaint BUT, since the files will be effectively lossless, encoding that file to a very high quality MP3 won't be a problem at all.
If they would have done this yesterday, I would have been certain it was an April fools' joke.
Or you could buy the cd, actually save money in some cases, and have a hard copy, album art, and drm free digital copies in whatever format you desire, including lossless. Really I see this as a half step in the right direction and a full step towards screwing over the users.
"Or you could buy the cd, actually save money in some cases, and have a hard copy, album art, and drm free digital copies in whatever format you desire, including lossless. Really I see this as a half step in the right direction and a full step towards screwing over the users."
The price for an album on iTunes is unchanged. Futhermore, last time I was in a CD shop I couldn't ask to only pay for the two songs I wanted off an album...
@erwos : DRM-free doesn't make it higher quality. Double the bit-rate does.
@jaxim : neither of the 'A's in AAC stands for Apple. AAC on it's own isn't proprietary. AAC+FairPlay is.
Here's the real question for Steve: Will he now be offering independent music DRM-free?
For pity's sake some of you people are stupid
MP3 IS PROPRIETARY AS AAC IS. IT'S YOUR PERCEPTION AND LACK OF KNOWLEDGE THAT MAKE IT LOOK NON-PROPRIETARY.
As someone else said even the Zune can do AAC as can a whole slew of other devices.
who created the AAC format? If Apple, then I'd rather have a format created by someone who isn't currently selling music. I'd prefer the music in MP3 or OGG.
"who created the AAC format? If Apple, then I'd rather have a format created by someone who isn't currently selling music."
And what if it wasn't Apple? Hint--it wasn't Apple.
The two-tier system is pretty surprising given Apple's emphasis upon simplicity...
MusicInterfaces.com
For all you complaining about this awesome step forward. Here are the steps to take in order to get the DRM-free tracks at the same price as the DRM tracks.
1. Go to the gas station.
2. Spot a chump.
3. Tell him you need to make a very important phone call to your sick grandmother but don't have any change. The chump will gladly give you the change for a phone call and even offer well wishes for your grandmother.
4. Go home, get on your computer, and find something else to complain about. I hear banks still don't give away free money. Why don't you start there?
AAC is partly developed by the same institutions as MP3. It's as proprietary or non-proprietary as MP3. The only reason why people think of the MP3 format as 'free' is that it has been the favourite format for music piracy, just as Microsoft's AVI format has been associated with DivX and pirated movies. Theoretically, if you create software or hardware that uses MP3, you should pay royalties to the Fraunhofer institute. If this all sounds like magic to you, maybe you should inform yourself before posting inane comments.
Did they tell anything about - say - digital watermarks or stuff like this.
so that music industry could identify the bad guy putting the purchased song in any p2p-network?
Honestly... it seems that people just want to complain. Most people who use AAC as their primary codec rip at 192 (if not just 128). Apple/EMI is offering DRM free tracks at better than alt-preset-standard for #1.29/track... AND is offering full albums in the same format with no premium whatsoever. PLUS EMI is opening the deal to other retailers to offer the same deal for WMV or even your most holy MP3.
I think $1.29 is a fine price to pay for a high-quality, interoperable single codec format. If you're afraid that aac or wmv or mp3 will become totally unsupported in your lifetime, then the CD is still an available option (with that unspoken premium still in effect).
The big question is... is this going to work in conjuction with the "Complete Your Album" option? If a premium song costs $1.29, but the album still only costs $9.99...
Excuse me for my techno-ignorance but.. Does this all mean that any digital audio player that can do MPEG-4 can also play the new DRM-free AAC-files from Apples iTunes?
Apparently you need a patent license - from a consortium, not from Apple - to manufacture technology with AAC-playback (just like MP3 & DVD). But for any player that says it can do MPEG4, the manufacturer would have HAD TO license AAC as well, correct?
wikipedia about AAC:
http://tinyurl.com/3djk98
I love it when an event or something proves that the "so-called geeks" don't know the frist f'ing thing about what they are talking about.
Nice that albums are the same price. My Zen doesn't do AAC though, release the albums in MP3 and I might buy one.
How about you just use iTunes to convert it to your precious mp3?
yes Tim this has been a very fun read. So many idiots. And so many people who just want to complain. Oh, and so many cheap thieving bastards.
All in all an entertaining motley crew.
waddo
Hey geeks,
do you know if it's planned to implement some sort of a digital watermark? i do know it's possible to do so with mp3-files... didn't read anything about whether they plan to do so or even if it's possible it in the article/comments. cheers
I think a better overall solution would have been to drop DRM completely for all EMI content and keep existing bitrate songs DRM-free and .99c (128bit), and make them also 1.29c at double bitrate. This is the only solution IMO that could please all people properly, both consumers and audiophiles alike.
Why would anybody be upset by them creating an additional choice? That is stupid. No one is forcing you to buy it. I myself don't have an iPod, but realize that iTunes is the best store around (besides AllofMP3) and I am glad that they are playing around with different configurations. I want to be legal, but I want to do what I want with the music I bought. This will let me do that.
If any of you guys agree with my last immediate comment, you can send your iTunes feedback to Apple here; http://www.apple.com/feedback/itunesapp.html I know I did.
If the other labels join in for the same deal, I'll start buying music on iTMS again. Again, for those who missed it - if you buy a full album you do *not* pay any more for the higher quality and DRM free tracks. You only pay more if you are buying individual tracks. If you buy an entire album it's still $9.99 and you get the 256 kbps AAC DRM free tracks. Nice. It's not as cheap as emusic, but the quality will be better, especially with regard to gapless playback - AAC works flawlessly for gapless, whereas I have problems with some of my VBR MP3 tracks from emusic.
Good, bad, or indifferent (I lean toward "good"), this (or something like it) was inevitable: At some point, sooner or later, a price difference was going to develop that reflected the relative value, and the longer it took, the greater the advantage for the first to break from the pack. The only options available were to reduce the price of existing offerings - rarely chosen because of the immediate financial blow - and offering more.
Whether the extra value is worth the extra price will be decided by the market, as always, but it's amusing to see that collectively, people never seem to learn, even (especially?) when their living is at stake: Every new development in the entertainment industry has met with apocalyptic panic levels in the incumbent distributors, leading to dire warnings, legal action, draconian legislation - and then, bold adoption by one reckless entrepreneur who leads the way to fantastically increased sales for everyone.
I'm not really a prognosticator, but I suspect that the dam has broken; expect this announcement to be followed by many more within weeks, maybe days - depending only on how quickly the impact on EMI's sales can be assessed. I don't think we'll see even ten percent of iTunes music tracks still DRM-only by year's end.
The only sane way for this business to operate is to trash all DRM - it won't work anyway, because it can't - and concentrate on detection and prosecution of actual violations. Because this appears to be a step in that direction, I think it's good.
Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are [DRM] free at last!
DRM does affect sound quality, because it takes away from the available bitrate for sound.
It most certainly does NOT take away from the available bitrate for sound. Just as adding album artwork to the song doesn't take away from the available bitrate for sound... yeesh.
Ok.. so where does the data for the album art go then?
Dont tell me, it just magically appears from a data bank in your mp3 player.
yeesher..
Ok.. so where does the data for the album art go then?
Dont tell me, it just magically appears from a data bank in your mp3 player.
yeesher..
I agree, the premium for DRM-free is not a good deal. Here's the problem, I recently purchased the new Arcade Fire album (which is great btw) from http://www.emusic.com for about $.25 per track based on my $10/mo for 40 track subscription. It's also on iTMS for $.99/track. While eMusic doesn't have the broad selection like iTMS, it does have some relevant stuff especially for more obscure / alternative artists. This points out the flaw in the premium pricing for DRM-Free, because my Arcade Fire tracks are very high bit rate MP3's. At the moment, I'm happy to work the system and get my more obscure stuff from emusic and then turn to iTMS or CDs for the big-label content. So, eventually people will get wise and the labels will have to get consistent and stop hoping people will be ignorant to pay 3x as much for a song on iTunes (or Zune or whatever) if it's also on a site like eMusic - or will this simply mean the death toll for eMusic? I hope not...
Ok.. so where does the data for the album art go then?
Dont tell me, it just magically appears from a data bank in your mp3 player.
yeesher..
Once again Ignorance rains supreme.
At this point I think some people would complain that a free wheel barrel of gold is too heavy.
I hate iTunes because they use DRM. I want to do what ever I want with my music. OK no DRM, do what you please (pirate), but it will cost you a little more.
What, now you hate non-DRMed music because it costs more.
You all need to get a life or a job.
Not amazing at all
http://www.eyje.com
As far as I am concerned, this is wonderful news, it never ceases to amaze me what Steve Jobs can pull off - it used to be Bill Gates with all that influence.
I for one will be very happy to buy non-DRMed music and not put it straight on P2P.
It is an interesting move though, it will be good for iTunes as they will sell more tracks, at a higher price. But it is a real threat to the ipod as it now breaks people free of the tyranny of the iTunes eco system. You can buy your songs on iTunes but play them quite happily on some other device.
Makes me wonder whether Jobs wrote his article about removing DRM trying to look all high and mighty but not expecting a label to actually do it - he might have just done severe damage to ipod sales. If other manufacturers can compete on ease of use/industrial design and/or just be cheaper and good enough they could now make quite a dent on the iPod market.
I will now(for the first time ever) purchase tracks/albums from Apples ITunes store. Great to see they have seen the light.
I will now(for the first time ever) purchase tracks/albums from Apples ITunes store. It great to see they have seen the light.