Napster To Go
- Started
- Last post
- 35 Responses
- puter0
If it were for the ipod I think reviews would be screaming
"Apple expects user to rent their music- another kool aid trick!"
The one benefit I see from this Napster thing is signing up, downloading a 1,000 songs, using AudioHijack or another audio recorder to record them as separate mp3's and then quitting the service.
- mrdobolina0
exactly puter, I give it a week before someone breaks microsoft's drm.
- JamesEngage0
I'm 29... so if I live to 99... it would cost me... 12,600 :)
- mrdobolina0
I haven't bought a new release in 6 or 7 years.
- JamesEngage0
plus a subscription means that if when they change the format... you dont have to.
The only down side is if they went tits up?
- unfitdutchfat0
whatver the format is, someone will make an app to tear them up
- JamesEngage0
I'd get it through work... would make a great music server type thing for the studio... and then put the ones I want on a portable player
dunno why america =15 dollars
and UK =15 pounds (being conned as usual)
- mrdobolina0
there has to be a way to break that microsoft drm.
- puter0
Depends on what you want I guess...
I dont think the going tits up is the only downside- to me "renting music" is such a completely retard idea- I couldn't imagine having my whole collection and having it taken away from say 3 years later because I didn't make my monthly payment.
- welded0
I canNOT see how this will win the 70% of online music shoppers or iPod owners over to Windows-based products.
Maybe if you were a hardcore iTunes user you wouldn't mind the extra $15 a month to download full length previews before buying the AAC version. Then again, you would have to use WMPBUT, as soon as an app that cracks the DRM gets out...
;)
- JamesEngage0
Only decent player is the creative zen though... which is not as nice as my ipod
- mirola0
no but take a look at http://allofmp3.com it's legal but the catalogue is sometimes disapointing. works out at about $1.5 for your average 45 min album. i've spent about $70 on there this month.
- JamesEngage0
started using napster and so far so good... feels a lot free'er not having to worry about losing all my tracks... like has happened a few times with my 40 gigs of music before
- moth0
MP3's still sound like crap if I buy them, rent them, or steal them.
I don't buy them because they are a substandard product.
Hence I use to them preview shit and find the good stuff I want to buy on CD.
MP3's are filthy crap.
I didn't pay £1000's on a decent hifi to play them through it....
- mrdobolina0
The way I see it, if I am buying music, I would need to have packaging.
- xaoscontrol0
the ad forget to mention that people can also rip thier CDs to load them onto the ipod.
plus, I can download an entire CD from iTunes for 1/2 the price of a CD from FYE or some record store. who cares about the packaging?
- JamesEngage0
because its all about the music
- puter0
FROM THE WASHINGTON POST:
Math Is Done: Napster To Go Doesn't Add Up
By Rob Pegoraro
Sunday, February 13, 2005;Whether you like Napster To Go, the online store's new music subscription service, depends on whether you think of it as all-you-can-eat or all-you-can-pay.
Both descriptions are accurate. For $15 a month, Napster To Go offers unlimited song downloads -- in a copy-restricted format that can be played only on Windows XP computers and some digital music players -- but these songs expire if you don't keep paying that fee each month.
In its "Do the math" ads, Napster asks customers to focus on the front end of this deal. Open an account, enter your billing info and start downloading. Don't stop until your hard drive is full, and you'll still have paid just $15. At any other music-download site, let alone a CD store, you'd have paid thousands of dollars for the privilege.
(You could also go on a download spree on a file-sharing service and owe nothing at all. But then you'd also be taking your chances with the often spyware-ridden software employed by these services, you'd have no guarantee of a quality download, and you'd have run up a frightful karmic debt, besides breaking the law. But I digress.)
Napster To Go's offer was once a common feature at early music sites until Apple's iTunes Music Store swept them from the market with its simple 99-cents-a-song setup.
Napster, however, uses newer Windows Media software to lend these songs a longer leash -- you can now copy them to certain digital music players.
Because this underlying software is so new, Napster To Go is the least compatible music store in existence. You can use it only on a Windows XP computer running Windows Media Player 10, and you can transfer your downloads only to a Windows Media-compatible player that includes special software and circuitry to enforce the pay-to-play deal.
So not only do these downloads not play on any iPod, they also don't work on most non-Apple players. Napster's site (www.napster.com) lists a total of nine compatible devices, seven of which need software updates. Microsoft suggests that others should work, including the latest Pocket PC handhelds from Dell and Hewlett-Packard, but Napster says it hasn't tested them yet.
The two players I tried, a Creative Zen Portable Media Center and an iRiver H10, both paired up with the service on the first try. But my song transfers weren't all smooth. On the first go-round with the Zen, the Napster software didn't file my new purchases -- I mean, rentals -- under the obvious playlist category, leading me to think that they hadn't been transferred at all. On the second test with the Zen, I somehow got two copies of a song on one album.
Fortunately, I never had a problem playing any of these files. And when I plugged in the iRiver player, all of these downloads transferred correctly.
Aside from the pay-to-listen requirement, Napster To Go songs can be stored on only three computers and three music players at a time, and they can't be burned to CD at all. (Making unrestricted copies of these downloads should be a trivial exercise, but it would also break the service's rules.)
The Napster To Go selection doesn't match the inventory of songs Napster actually sells. The service estimates that "about 90 percent" of that catalogue is available under the To Go program -- blame the usual licensing issues for this -- but the utter randomness of that selection makes this feel worse than it is. For example, on a Rolling Stones compilation, "Tumbling Dice" can be rented, but "Wild Horses," just a year older, can only be bought.
All that said, using Napster To Go offered the same frictionless consumption I remember from the original, free Napster service. Want to tune in to music from strange genres or check out a band just because it has an interesting name? Why not? It won't cost you extra.
It wasn't until after my initial binge that I thought a bit more about the virtues of this service. What Napster's ads ignore is that most people already own a significant music collection -- so how many songs will they grab once they sign onto this service? How about after the first month or year? Even the most manic downloader has to slow down eventually.
Napster To Go's $15 monthly bills, however, will keep coming due for as long as you care to listen to your downloads. And over time, those fees add up, too.
Consider this example: I have been purchasing CDs for about 20 years now, in which time I've accumulated about 300 of the things. At an average of $15 each, I've spent $4,500. Now suppose that, instead of buying those CDs, I could have opened up a Napster To Go account back in 1985. My total bill would be $3,600 and counting -- and although I might have accumulated a larger, more diverse collection, I wouldn't own any of it.
I have a hard time accepting that. At its best, music has the same lasting value as books or paintings or any other sort of meaningful art: It isn't a disposable good that you use and then forget about. It's something that you keep listening to and discovering new things in. When music is good, you want to know that it can't be taken away from you.
Napster To Go doesn't allow for that. And when you realize this point, it looks less like a service that allows you to pay to get new music and more like one that forces you to pay to keep your existing music.
- Meeklo0
I hope the never go to the subscription part, that is kinda like renting music..
you dont really own anything, and the fact that apple has some sort of password protection systems to their songs, makes me think that the mp3 system is still crappy to me, I rather pay for a cd.
- JamesEngage0
dunno if I can be bother with owning mp3s anymore easier just to have them avaiable when I want them... and not feel I need my whole collection on a hard drive