[blessingx]

Here ya go. No word yet on bitrates and if only EMI.

 

[Febs]

I love this:

Quote:

"The EMI announcement on Monday was not exclusive to Apple," said Katy Asher, a Microsoft spokeswoman on the Zune team, in an e-mail to the IDG News Service today. She said Microsoft has been talking with EMI and other record labels "for some time now" about offering unprotected music on its Zune players in an effort to meet the needs of its customers.

Ha! I wonder if Ms. Asher expects anyone to believe that. She probably needed to make the comment in an e-mail because she couldn't say it out loud with a straight face.

 

[blessingx]

I like this quote:
Quote:

In February, Apple CEO and founder Steve Jobs stirred up controversy when he called for an end to DRM in an open letter to the industry published on Apple's Web site. At the time, Microsoft responded harshly to Jobs' statement -- a Zune spokesman called it naive and irresponsible -- but now the company seems to have literally changed its tune.

Anyway good news for consumers. With at least EMI, Apple and MS behind DRM-free (not to mention eMusic, etc.), hopefully everyone will come around.

 

[Ricardo Dawkins]

uhhh....it was EMI decision. Sorry. But EMI took the decision to allow DRM free music from their catalog on itunes.

If it was really a Apple lead or decision, I ask. Where are the other labels doing the same thing as EMI ?

 

[blessingx]

Well it certainly was EMIs decision, though it could be Apples lead. If BMG follows EMI the way that MS followed Apple would you dismiss EMI being first? I don't want to over-exaggerate Apples part as that press conference seemed a little rushed and more importantly EMI after all owns the licenses and is taking the largest risk, but Jobs (for whatever reason - even defensive) did say he wanted to sell DRM-free tracks and thought the industry should go that route. MS thought Jobs proposal was "naive and irresponsible". Are you saying EMI is forcing MS to now sell DRM-free tracks against their wishes? Are you saying EMI did the same to Apple too? Is there any difference here between MS and Apple.

Again this is great news for consumers and who's first may not matter (I didn't start this thread to rub it in), but I doubt this was a MS initiative unless you know something I don't. I don't doubt though there will be a PR history rewrite as often happens between these companies.

 

[Brewmaster]

I agree this is good for consumers. The question becomes which format to become locked into.

Looks like the choices will be AAC vs. WMV.

From my experience it looks like there are more devices that support WMV (car stereos, home stereos, PDA's, phones). Too bad it's a MS format.

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brewmaster /img/forum/go_quote.gif I agree this is good for consumers. The question becomes which format to become locked into. Looks like the choices will be AAC vs. WMV. From my experience it looks like there are more devices that support WMV (car stereos, home stereos, PDA's, phones). Too bad it's a MS format.

AAC vs. WMV?
AAC is an audio codec, while WMV is a video codec. How can they compete? Hmm...

Anyway, its nice to see that Microsoft will drop their DRM protection as well.

 

[Febs]

I'm sure he meant WMA.

 

[cooperpwc]

AAC is not a proprietary format. From the Wikipedia article:

"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."

Personally I prefer Lame MP3 because of the encoder quality but in theory AAC is a superior standard. It's associated with Apple in people's minds because Apple chose to use it for iTunes and their success has made it ubiquitous.

 

[Ricardo Dawkins]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blessingx /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well it certainly was EMIs decision, though it could be Apples lead. If BMG follows EMI the way that MS followed Apple would you dismiss EMI being first? I don't want to over-exaggerate Apples part as that press conference seemed a little rushed and more importantly EMI after all owns the licenses and is taking the largest risk, but Jobs (for whatever reason - even defensive) did say he wanted to sell DRM-free tracks and thought the industry should go that route. MS thought Jobs proposal was "naive and irresponsible". Are you saying EMI is forcing MS to now sell DRM-free tracks against their wishes? Are you saying EMI did the same to Apple too? Is there any difference here between MS and Apple. Again this is great news for consumers and who's first may not matter (I didn't start this thread to rub it in), but I doubt this was a MS initiative unless you know something I don't. I don't doubt though there will be a PR history rewrite as often happens between these companies.

No, I'm saying every news post is wrong. apple did nothing. It's EMI leveraging Itunes marketshare. nothing else. BTW, MS CEO Bill Gates was quoted saying in a interview about DRM: "Buy the CD" several weeks before SJ.

 

[zip22]

you're right ricardo, every single news post is wrong and you are right. apple had nothing to do with it. thats why steve jobs was at the emi press event to announce the deal and the ceo of emi said "Apple have been a true pioneer in digital music, and we are delighted that they share our vision of an interoperable market that provides consumers with greater choice, quality, convenience and value for money." yup, apple had nothing whatsoever to do with it.

bill gates saying "buy the cd" is very different from steve jobs saying that he would like to pressure music companies to remove drm. gates took a passive role, jobs took an active role. gates never suggested getting rid of drm, he suggests they need to work on the drm system and if you as a consumer don't like it, go somewhere else. jobs said he didn't like the drm system and pressured the music industry to abandon it.

 

[Ricardo Dawkins]

But CD's are w/o DRM, right ?
And are LOSSLESS the way you like IT, right ?

BTW, I dont understand you. How SJ is pressuring the labels if this was solely an EMI decision as they made a test run of DRM-less tracks on some service before itunes ?

 

[Febs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ricardo Dawkins /img/forum/go_quote.gif But CD's are w/o DRM, right ? And are LOSSLESS the way you like IT, right ? BTW, I dont understand you. How SJ is pressuring the labels if this was solely an EMI decision as they made a test run of DRM-less tracks on some service before itunes ?

Can you provide links to any articles that support this notion of yours that EMI reached this decision independent of Jobs' call for the elimination of DRM from online music services?

 

[LFC_SL]

Even though I am yet to jump on the iPod bandwagon, I recognised Apple's importance. First gapless. Now DRM-free. Hopefully in a couple of years this snowballs into all music DRM free and Apple will make iTunes optional and allow drag+drop as well!

Or I could just be happy with my lot

 

[Spaceage]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LFC_SL /img/forum/go_quote.gif Even though I am yet to jump on the iPod bandwagon, I recognised Apple's importance. First gapless. Now DRM-free. Hopefully in a couple of years this snowballs into all music DRM free and Apple will make iTunes optional and allow drag+drop as well! Or I could just be happy with my lot

Apple isn't a leader in gapless. Sony has had gapless players for years.

But I highly doubt Sony will follow Apple and Microsoft's lead in offering DRM free music (At this point I only buy from them on occasion because they do BOGO albums on Tuesdays.)