[Macworld]

Post your comments for Expo: DRM-free announcement is music to consumers' ears here

[scotts13]

Reality for me is that this will allow me to purchase music digitally. In the original DRM scheme, I bought a total of five titles; there were very few tracks that I needed badly enough to get them NOW, without concern if they'll be playable later.
I'll still buy music primarily on CD and rip them, as I like having the physical copy; but now I might buy three, four, or even five tracks a year online!

[reallycrazy]

Apple did not decide to go DRM free. The major labels let Apple sell their songs without DRM in exchange for a 30 percent price hike.
And believe me, it is a price hit. All the popular music (not just today's so-called "hits", but all the hits from the last 40 years) will be $1.29.
The ONLY people who will pay less, are the people who like music that never had any mass popularity.
I think this price hike will just get kids to go back to file sharing, particularly in light of the current global economic crisis.

[luckylindy]

I have not heard or read that Amazon will be bound by the same pricing. So, their new songs would stay at 89 cents versus iTunes' $1.29. Sounds like Apple is getting the shaft...unless someone here knows otherwise.

[jmincey]

The person who goes by the pseudonym of "reallycrazy" makes a good point -- well, if the premise is correct that the price hike will apply to virtually all popular music of the last several decades.
If this proves to be the case, then a price increase of nearly a third is indeed preposterous, but not the least surprising from one of the most incompetent and myopic industries known to humanity -- the music industry.
Jeff Mincey

[natmusak]

@reallycrazy,

I say let the major labels hang themselves if they want to up the price with the economy the way it is. If indie labels hold steady at $0.99, maybe it will even push customers to question the Big Four's overwhelmingly crappy artists (not that most of them deserve that classification).

We could also see a repeat of EMI's move to iTunes Plus: initially all songs were at $1.29 but dropped back to $0.99 a few months later.

[jmincey]

What's interesting here is that the major music labels have treated Apple differently from other music sellers presumably because they have feared the undue power Apple would wield because of its high market share. Hence the favorable terms to Amazon and others.
And yet, which party has just thrown its weight around and effectively extorted the other party? Which power here need be feared?
Why should this pitiful excuse for an industry not once again be investigated for collusion and price fixing?
Jeff Mincey

[hurtle]

Like most people, I don't really care about DRM removal, the big gain for me is the doubling of the bitrate to 256kps, I know that some people will claim that they can't hear the difference, to me the difference is huge, high frequencies are much smoother at this bit rate and the whole mix tends to sound more open and transparent.
I just wish Apple had chosen to go lossless, but I guess you can't have everything

[Captain_Video]

I purchase songs to use in producing slideshows and videos. DRM music can't be used with certain apps and it was a pain to remove the DRM.

[Steve_S]

reallycrazy said:

Apple did not decide to go DRM free. The major labels let Apple sell their songs without DRM in exchange for a 30 percent price hike.

And believe me, it is a price hit. All the popular music (not just today's so-called "hits", but all the hits from the last 40 years) will be $1.29.

The irony here is that Apple offered these same labels a better deal with the original iTunes Plus offering. All DRM free 256bit tracks were 1.29. By holding out, the labels ended up losing sales and getting a lesser deal whereby many of these "plus" tracks will be sold for .69 or .99 cents. The record label's attempt to stifle Apple's lead has failed. It's times like this, I'm kind of happy the masses aren't bright enough to be concerned about DRM.

[itommac]

Expo: "DRM-free announcement is music to consumers' ears" was the headline of Dan Moren's report and I thought FINALLY the recording companies and Apple had come to their senses.
I read this reporting with great expectations until I saw it wasn't going to be completed until April.
So until then I have to download the 99 cent song on to an ancient windows pc, then use software, Windows software, to remove the DRM. And only then may I transfer the music to my Mac Mini so it can be the server for MP3's for use with my wireless Macbook Pro.
Gee that's simple OR I could wait until April to make certain I'm downloading iTunes that are free of DRM OR I'll use Amazon for downloads OR buy CDs at Half.com and rip music that I have purchased there.
How is that for Apple's reputation for simple elegance~!