iTunes Rocks
I stand by what I said here regarding Apple's poor marketing ability. Nonetheless, their technology is great. Although I already had MusicMatch, given that I also have an iPod and had seen how seamlessly iTunes integrates with the iPod from a friend who had both, I decided to give iTunes a whirl. First, the software was free, so there wasn't a lot of risk. Second, I wanted to try the much vaunted iTunes Music Store, where I could download items a la carte for 99 cents each.
I was able to find most of the stuff I was looking for tonight. I downloaded Black Uhuru's "Black Uhuru Anthem", Harry Belafonte's "Man Smart (Woman Smarter)", Ella Fitzgerald's version of "Blue Skies", Judy Collins singing "Marieke", an entire folk album by John Renbourn, and Monty Python's "Live at City Center". Pretty decent variety. Oddly, though, they have virtually no Beatles songs. Plenty of Rolling Stones and David Bowie, but no Beatles. I hope they plan on rectifying that within short order.
The interface is better than MusicMatch too. Everything is available from the main screen if you so choose. You can show just the library, but if you also elect to show the browser, you can access any genre, any artist, or any album without having to switch views. All your playlists are on the left menu for easy switching. It shows you what songs you've recently played and the top 25 songs you've played most often. It also allows you to rate songs, look at your top-rated songs, and create playlists on the basis of your ratings.
The integration with the iPod is better than the MusicMatch integration. Rather than having to open a separate window and wait forever before it recognizes the iPod, iTunes allows you to navigate within the same interface and recognizes the iPod immediately. Of course this means nothing to you if you don't own an iPod. Although if you don't, why the hell not? Unless you're not a music fan. If you are and want your music portable, the iPod is fabby. And I'm working with one of the old, thicker models. I hear the new ones are even better.
Aside from the little weirdness regarding Beatles songs, all in all iTunes is great, and iTunes with iPod is truly fantastic. Give it a shot. What have you got to lose?
Comments
>
My understanding is that Apple records, the Beatle's label, once sued Apple Computers for copyright infringement, and the suit was settled with the stipulation that Apple Computers would never try to get into the music business (such a venture might "confuse" consumers into believing that this was a sanctioned enterprise or even a joint venture). As a result of Apple's entry into the music market, Apple records recently instituted a new suit claiming copyright infringement - and it seems like this time they may actually have a case. It will be interesting to see how this plays out; personally, I hope an amicable settlement can be reached.
Posted by: Rob Ward | October 20, 2003 01:01 AM
When they entered into the settlement, it made sense. At that time, Apple Records was far better known than Apple Computers. Times have changed. Until someone reminds me, I never remember that the Beatles recording label was Apple Records. Whenever anyone talks about the company "Apple", I immediately think of computers. I am quite sure that this is a widespread phenomenon. I don't believe that Apple Records has to fear brand dilution or consumer confusion over iTunes, the only reasons they should win a copyright infringement suit.
Of course they are probably suing for breach of contract, not copyright infringement. We'll have to see what happens. I think a case could be made that owning a store that sells music is quite different from "being in the music business" which could be interpreted to mean being in the performance/publishing side of things.
Posted by: Lesley | October 20, 2003 07:38 AM
It will be fascinating to see what happens to record labels, now that the "product" they sold in the past is changing its form entirely. The cultural and economic impact of ideas such as iTunes means that music - and soon (I'm guessing) movies - no longer require a physical store for distribution. In fact, for someone with a high-speed internet connection and a credit card, it will take longer to go to the store and look through the bins for very costly CDs. Given the increased availability of cheaper recording technology, the day may come when musicians may no longer need a record contract - they could license their music to services such as iTunes, record at local studios (which will replace record companies as the critical path to success, since studios have the equipment that hasn't gotten much cheaper, such as high-quality microphones, mixers, etc), and contract with savvy Internet-based PR firms for publicity (or they could hook up with Edina Monsoon). I guess the question is, what will be the role, if any, of record companies in the future? I'd love to hear your thoughts. -- Rob
Posted by: Rob Ward | October 20, 2003 02:01 PM
You won't find the Beatles on ANY legal download service, iTunes Music Store included. The Beatles and their label, Apple Records, have always been late to the party concerning new technology. At the beginning of the CD era, for example, the Beatles waited over 5 years to release any of their albums on CD, and even then, it took several years to get the complete catalog out. Though there are some legal squabbles about the Apple trademark, the lack of Beatles tunes has much more to do with the Beatles' attitude toward new media.
Posted by: August Trometer | October 20, 2003 08:36 PM
Only semi-related, but of interest to the two or three MAC users out there.
I've always been of the opinion that the reason there are no viri, trogans, worms etc. for MAC's is in part due to their terrible market strategy. Why bother to write code to exploit a security hole in a MAC. What are you going to do? Inconvienience 3 people?
Well either someone wanted to annoy three people or they are just bull headed enough to spend the time to write the code just because MAC users like to claim it can't be done.
@stake is warning of 3 security holes in MAC's, ranking 2 of them as high. As of now Apple is mulling over whether to patch the hole, or tell the three users tough. Want to fix it? Buy the next OS. MAC OS 10 Panther. Hope it doesn't work, think what would happen if Bill found that idea appealing, "hmmm make them buy a new OS for each and every security hole found .... If I only had a penny for each and every security hole on each and every windows OS based PC - oh wait I do ... maybe I can get more ..."
Posted by: Justin | October 30, 2003 12:32 PM