# iTunes price hike...



## telarium (May 7, 2004)

As noted on Slashdot and The Register - the price of some songs in iTunes will be upped to $1.25. 

Since I surely won't be paying for this anymore, I suppose I've now rendered my iPod useless (old 5 Gigger) in the legal music arena.

I had considered purchasing a new iPod to replace my older one, but now I think I'm going to take my business to one of the other MP3/WMV players out there. Any suggestions -- I'm thinking of something with a battery life longer than 10 minutes (equivalent to the amount of time my current iPod holds a charge)? 

I was also considering a G5 to compliment my G4, but I think Alienware will be my option now...

Brad

P.S. - I suppose I should add that they will be selling some albums for $16.99. I think I'll just go purchase the cd for cheaper (Wal-Mart?), and rip it to whatever format I want, without limitations. 

I love bait-and-switch.


----------



## MisterMe (May 7, 2004)

telarium said:
			
		

> As noted on Slashdot and The Register - the price of some songs in iTunes will be upped to $1.25.
> 
> Since I surely won't be paying for this anymore, I suppose I've now rendered my iPod useless (old 5 Gigger) in the legal music arena.
> 
> ...


Are you so naive to believe that the prices will rise only at the iTMS? Reportedly, the record companies are demanding that Apple raises its prices for online music. You think that Wal-Mart and Real Networks have greater control over its prices? If so, how is that possible?


----------



## Anim8r (May 7, 2004)

telarium said:
			
		

> As noted on Slashdot and The Register - the price of some songs in iTunes will be upped to $1.25.
> 
> Since I surely won't be paying for this anymore, I suppose I've now rendered my iPod useless (old 5 Gigger) in the legal music arena.
> 
> ...



You do that. Enjoy the crashable registerry goodness.

Oh, and if you think Apple has anything to do with this you are sadly mistaken. The big 5 are now going to squeeze whatever they can from the online services until they drive everyone back to the P2P networks.


----------



## telarium (May 7, 2004)

MisterMe said:
			
		

> Are you so naive to believe that the prices will rise only at the iTMS? Reportedly, the record companies are demanding that Apple raises its prices for online music. You think that Wal-Mart and Real Networks have greater control over its prices? If so, how is that possible?



Wal-Mart sells music for 88 cents, at a loss - so as to attract customers to their other offerings. If they're selling it at a loss now, I don't see why they wouldn't keep the 88 cent price point - and take a slightly bigger loss, while, in turn, making themselves the more attractive music service - and more attractive retailer altogether.

Touche.

Brad


----------



## telarium (May 7, 2004)

Anim8r said:
			
		

> You do that. Enjoy the crashable registerry goodness.
> 
> Oh, and if you think Apple has anything to do with this you are sadly mistaken. The big 5 are now going to squeeze whatever they can from the online services until they drive everyone back to the P2P networks.



I didn't say I was going to be running Windows. In fact, I'll be running FreeBSD (or OpenBSD depending on environmental specifications). 

Further, I didn't say Apple had anything to do with it. But they do offer iPods, and do direct people to their iTunes music store with a selling point of 99 cents a song. And I am virtually forced to use their service for legal music. But, suprisingly, you have one thing right: I did say I would be moving back to a p2p service. 

Touche again.

Brad


----------



## mrfluffy (May 7, 2004)

telarium said:
			
		

> Since I surely won't be paying for this anymore, I suppose I've now rendered my iPod useless (old 5 Gigger) in the legal music arena.



you do realise it is legal to buy CDs, rip them to mp3 or aac and use them.


----------



## HateEternal (May 7, 2004)

Alienware machines are good if you like to spend a lot of money on a cool case.


----------



## telarium (May 7, 2004)

mrfluffy said:
			
		

> you do realise it is legal to buy CDs, rip them to mp3 or aac and use them.



"I suppose I should add that they will be selling some albums for $16.99. I think I'll just go purchase the cd for cheaper (Wal-Mart?), and rip it to whatever format I want, without limitations."


The point I'm trying to make is that the convienence factor, which is a selling point within itself, is no longer there. But I have no problem physically purchasing the cds, ripping and encoding them, and putting them on my iPod - just a few more steps than iTMS music itself.

Brad


----------



## telarium (May 7, 2004)

HateEternal said:
			
		

> Alienware machines are good if you like to spend a lot of money on a cool case.



Doesn't this sound a lot like the G5?

Brad


----------



## Ripcord (May 7, 2004)

Note that Apple has denied that prices will be going up:

http://www.macrumors.com/c.php?u=ht...d=%7BBE431165-5C52-41B0-A8F5-F8664498302B%7D&


----------



## Ripcord (May 7, 2004)

telarium said:
			
		

> Doesn't this sound a lot like the G5?
> 
> Brad



Not at all.  I would have much-preferred my case didn't look like a giant cheese grater.


----------



## telarium (May 7, 2004)

Ripcord said:
			
		

> Not at all.  I would have much-preferred my case didn't look like a giant cheese grater.



No, no, no... _cool_ case. As in one that keeps the heat out...

Brad


----------



## Captain Code (May 7, 2004)

Ripcord said:
			
		

> Note that Apple has denied that prices will be going up:
> 
> http://www.macrumors.com/c.php?u=ht...d=%7BBE431165-5C52-41B0-A8F5-F8664498302B%7D&



Yeah, Steve himself said the price won't go up, and in fact, should go down.  Who should we trust, Steve, who is in control of the contracts with the thieves(Big 5), or some online news site?


----------



## ablack6596 (May 7, 2004)

And you trust the NY Post.  ::ha::


----------



## j79 (May 7, 2004)

ablack6596 said:
			
		

> And you trust the NY Post.  ::ha::



That's the attitude I'm taking on this "news."

Hopefully it's not true. IF it is, I won't be purchasing any of the 1.25 music (and definitely won't be buying an album at 16.99 - Nor will I buy them at Walmart for a cheaper price - I'll download it! Screw the industry if they want to screw us....)


----------



## mrfluffy (May 7, 2004)

telarium said:
			
		

> The point I'm trying to make is that the convienence factor, which is a selling point within itself, is no longer there. But I have no problem physically purchasing the cds, ripping and encoding them, and putting them on my iPod - just a few more steps than iTMS music itself.
> 
> Brad


So when you said "I suppose I've now rendered my iPod useless (old 5 Gigger) in the legal music arena" you meant you've made it slightly less convenient.

And the Mac observer also reported that the prices aren't going up
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2004/05/07.11.shtml


----------



## Ripcord (May 7, 2004)

j79 said:
			
		

> Hopefully it's not true. IF it is, I won't be purchasing any of the 1.25 music (and definitely won't be buying an album at 16.99 - Nor will I buy them at Walmart for a cheaper price - I'll download it! Screw the industry if they want to screw us....)



Then buy your music at www.allofmp3.com =)


----------



## j79 (May 7, 2004)

Ripcord said:
			
		

> Then buy your music at www.allofmp3.com =)



I love the idea (paying for bandwidth, essentially) - but what scares me is the fact that it's some company in Russia. Not that that's a bad thing. Just, I trust giving my credit card number to a company like Apple than a company in Russia.....


I should check to see if they have some dance/electronic/techno music on their site.. If they do, maybe i'll try it out..

BTW, Apple has denied the price hikes. Like it's been said already.. It was the NY Post..... (Apple should send them a C&D letter for anything related to Apple.. "Sorry, we don't like rumors...")


----------



## telarium (May 7, 2004)

mrfluffy said:
			
		

> So when you said "I suppose I've now rendered my iPod useless (old 5 Gigger) in the legal music arena" you meant you've made it slightly less convenient.
> 
> And the Mac observer also reported that the prices aren't going up
> http://www.macobserver.com/article/2004/05/07.11.shtml



Alright, Legal *online* *popular* *non-indie* music.

Christ-

Brad


----------



## Randman (May 8, 2004)

A bit of an overreaction to a rumor. One quickly dispelled. Sheesh.


----------



## mdnky (May 8, 2004)

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...040507/wr_nm/tech_apple_music_dc&sid=95573661



> SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Apple Computer Inc. (Nasdaq:AAPL - news) on Friday flatly denied a report that the computer maker was planning to raise prices for songs bought on its popular iTunes online music store.
> 
> "These rumors aren't true," said Apple spokeswoman Natalie Sequeira. "We have multiyear agreements with the labels and our prices remain 99 cents a track."
> 
> Apple's statement came after the New York Post reported on Friday, citing one unnamed source, that music fans may have to start paying more for some songs on Apple's music store following contract renegotiations with the record labels ahead of the one-year anniversary of the store.


----------



## Satcomer (May 8, 2004)

I believe this was discussed with Apple by the RIAA when Apple & the RIAA hashed out the new FairPlay (version 2) in iTunes 4.5. However, I think someone at Apple pointed it out to the RIAA how it would be suicide  for the RIAA to raise the price or a big fat lawsuit to raise it just for iTunes. iTunes still holds the lion share of the legal music download sites and raising the rate now (by the RIAA) you just stop the "good karma" of legal down loading. Why would they shoot themselves in the foot like that. I can personally say iTunes re-sparked my interest in music and since the introduction of the iTunes music store it has caused me to replace a lot of old album music with CD's. The 99¢ value is just right, not to hot, nor to cold (I know that sounded corny).


----------



## drunkmac (May 8, 2004)

G5 and Alienware..oh wait. Ones a dual-2.0ghz 64-bit BEAST... I AM GOING TO MOLEST YOU AND KISS YOU SWEETLY.....G5 kicks your alienware's apple. And why do you need BSD? Are you some programmer trying to make a statement? I prefer ease and use. And pretty.


----------



## telarium (May 8, 2004)

drunkmac said:
			
		

> G5 and Alienware..oh wait. Ones a dual-2.0ghz 64-bit BEAST... I AM GOING TO MOLEST YOU AND KISS YOU SWEETLY.....G5 kicks your alienware's apple. And why do you need BSD? Are you some programmer trying to make a statement? I prefer ease and use. And pretty.



Better unicode support and a lockdown feature might be a few features. 

And when it comes to server applications, I would love to see an x86 vs. G5 comparison - especially with a dual proc. 2.0 Ghz AMD 64-bit beast. And especially if both have FreeBSD at their core. I can see an x86 victory here... I'm not a programmer making a statement (and why/what would I 'program' in Free/OpenBSD? - maybe use emacs, which is available on OS X anyway) - I'm running a serious network that needs upward scalability for cheap. Apple's Xserve was an option, but at $2,999 a pop and a ship date beyond 12 weeks for orders over 20, I didn't have the time or money. If the 90 nm chips had come out in a timely fashion, yes, maybe it would have been a more serious contender. The fact is, I work in a time-critical environment where each piece of equipment is absolutely necessary. Some of our older equipment was failing, so we called up Apple and told them we'd be willing to purchase 22 Xserves if they were delivered in 3 weeks, beyond that, it would be impossible because of the extra week we factored in for migration issues. After this 4 week limit, we would be jeopardizing some of our most critical, time-sensative work (specifically processing massive amounts of data into digital video from a beta, 3/4, and DV deck where our customer expects us done under time-specific contractual terms).

Anway, called up Apple - the gentleman I talked to was professional until I asked about delivery options - he then laughed at me, almost histerically (sp?), when I inquired about speed'y' delivery. He said, '12 weeks, no sooner.' 

Called up Alienware, asked for 22 fo their comparable DV/server farm systems (which were roughly equivalent in cost). The President (Jon or Jim or something) immediately place my order with him. Not only that, the systems were available immediately and will be delivered by Alienware this Monday (5/8). To ensure satisfaction, the President himself *still fumbling around for his name* will be watching the set up and migration - I was very pleased at this, as were my superiors. Not only that, Alienware threw in an HD editing station (market $10,000) for free because of the size and nature of our order. 

The hostility I received on this forum has convinced me to go straight back to x86  - without any doubts. And I don't think my reaction was overblown to this issue -- yes, they may be $.99 - but they now limit burns to 7  (from 10). 7 burns still ain't bad, but the mere fact that they changed the terms of what I can do with my music scares me. What's next? You can now only burn your music 2 times? 1 time? You can't share it anymore? You can only share it with people from states that begin with 'M'? I mean, the possibilities here are endless and scary. And most of the articles, I remind you, state that the $.99 price will stay that way, _for now_ -- so what's next? Not so smart as to answer me that, eh?


Brad


----------



## kermit64 (May 8, 2004)

i don't see the precedent for a service model that never changes.  rates go up all the time in cable, satelite, telephone, cell phone, credit cards, mortgage payments.  why do you think apple has the unique obligation to remain steadfast at the .99 cent pricepoint.
many many factors go into the decision of price for the itunes music store.  just like many many factors go into your decision to buy servers from alienware.  the good thing about the itunes music store is that you know that when you buy a song now at .99 cents, when they raise the price in the future, you won't have to pay the difference to keep your song.  and if they take away all your burning limitations there could be grounds for suit to protect your rights to that song that you purchased.  but in essence you have the option to buy it or not.  and just because apple doens't offer the product you want doesn't mean their product is inherently bad.
just go buy what you want.


----------



## Captain Code (May 8, 2004)

There are known supply problems for the G5 chips used in XServes.  The big orders of hundreds or a thousand(Virginia Tech comes to mind) will be filled first.  

If there were supply problems with the Opteron, the story from Alienware would be the same.

Apple changed the number of times a playlist can be burned based on customer feedback and need.  Not very many people are burning 10 copies of the same CD, and really, why would you need to?  So instead they are letting you share it between more computers in your house, which is a lot more likely to be needed than burning 10 copies of the same playlist.


----------



## telarium (May 8, 2004)

Captain Code said:
			
		

> There are known supply problems for the G5 chips used in XServes.  The big orders of hundreds or a thousand(Virginia Tech comes to mind) will be filled first.
> 
> If there were supply problems with the Opteron, the story from Alienware would be the same.
> 
> Apple changed the number of times a playlist can be burned based on customer feedback and need.  Not very many people are burning 10 copies of the same CD, and really, why would you need to?  So instead they are letting you share it between more computers in your house, which is a lot more likely to be needed than burning 10 copies of the same playlist.



I agree. But it is the principle of the subject, not the exact nature of it. 

There aren't, however, supply problems with the Opteron. I'm not saying that the G5 is any less of a capable system -- in fact, I'm eager to get my hands on one. The problem I have is with the fact that if I can't get it (especially for mission-critical applications) then it is completely useless to me. This isn't a complaint or rant, but reality. If Apple can't fulfill my order in a timely fashion, then I'll be taking my business elsewhere. And as I said, this doesn't make the G5 any less capable, just less accessable...


Brad


----------



## kermit64 (May 8, 2004)

telarium said:
			
		

> Since I surely won't be paying for this anymore, I suppose I've now rendered my iPod useless (old 5 Gigger) in the legal music arena.
> ...
> I love bait-and-switch.





			
				telarium said:
			
		

> And I am virtually forced to use their service for legal music.





			
				telarium said:
			
		

> The hostility I received on this forum has convinced me to go straight back to x86 - without any doubts. And I don't think my reaction was overblown to this issue -- yes, they may be $.99 - but they now limit burns to 7 (from 10). 7 burns still ain't bad, but the mere fact that they changed the terms of what I can do with my music scares me. What's next? You can now only burn your music 2 times? 1 time? You can't share it anymore? You can only share it with people from states that begin with 'M'? I mean, the possibilities here are endless and scary. And most of the articles, I remind you, state that the $.99 price will stay that way, for now -- so what's next? Not so smart as to answer me that, eh?





			
				telarium said:
			
		

> This isn't a complaint or rant, but reality.


----------



## Ripcord (May 8, 2004)

drunkmac said:
			
		

> G5 and Alienware..oh wait. Ones a dual-2.0ghz 64-bit BEAST... I AM GOING TO M***** YOU AND KISS YOU SWEETLY.....G5 kicks your alienware's apple. And why do you need BSD? Are you some programmer trying to make a statement? I prefer ease and use. And pretty.



That's exactly the sort of over-defensive,  incoherent, blind rambling that tend to give Mac users the "zealot" title.  Especially when telarium has some good points.


----------



## dlloyd (May 8, 2004)

Notice the the screen name of the "over-defensive, incoherent, blind rambler".. 

Anyway, I think telarium was being an alarmist personally, and a little bit of a troll to boot. Honestly, you really think this is Apple's fault? They are trying, they really are, but it's not all their problem. If you don't like it, well... you aren't being forced to stay.


----------



## Randman (May 8, 2004)

Well said.


----------



## telarium (May 9, 2004)

dlloyd said:
			
		

> Notice the the screen name of the "over-defensive, incoherent, blind rambler"..
> 
> Anyway, I think telarium was being an alarmist personally, and a little bit of a troll to boot. Honestly, you really think this is Apple's fault? They are trying, they really are, but it's not all their problem. If you don't like it, well... you aren't being forced to stay.




An alarmist? Maybe. I troll, don't see it. I did make some good points, and I didn't say Apple wasn't trying -- I'm just a bit scared of the RIAA's influence and Apple's response (which has been positive thus far). But let's think this out logically. Wholesale prices of CDs have gone up... And maybe Apple has multi-year contracts, but when those contracts are up -- do you imagine that the .99 cent price will remain? Even if it does, what future limitations does Apple have in store for us? 

Look, I'm trying to raise general concern here -- not scream fire in a crowded room. I have my gripes about Apple - but honestly, I practically adore Panther, and for personal use, I would use my Apple over anything. I even like iTunes, but I'm weary of the future of a program I really do enjoy. Why am I weary? Because there aren't really any other equivalent programs (maybe WinAmp and Windows Media Player) -- so in fact, I'm highlighting the positive nature of iTunes coexisting with a negative aspect of FairPlay and what this all means for the end-user. 

Many of my previous posts have contributed insight and generated positive, intellectual responses. 

If you don't like my posts, well...you aren't being forced to respond. 

Brad

And furthermore, who designates what I can or can't say here? God forbid I raise a little general concern here.


----------



## Quicksilver (May 9, 2004)

j79 said:
			
		

> That's the attitude I'm taking on this "news."
> 
> Hopefully it's not true. IF it is, I won't be purchasing any of the 1.25 music (and definitely won't be buying an album at 16.99 - Nor will I buy them at Walmart for a cheaper price - I'll download it! Screw the industry if they want to screw us....)





Too Right! the record labels will shoot them selves in the foot, greedy bastards! they havent let it soak in properly yet, they should at least wait till iTMS is fully international. Then mabey they have a leg to stand on. Mabey.


----------



## fryke (May 9, 2004)

Ah, calm down, everyone... I don't see Apple raising the prices of the songs. There's basically no way that they could do that right now (unless the record companies would raise prices for all other services, too) without seriously killing both iPod and iTunes-tracks sales.

I also don't see the record biggies urging Apple to raise prices now that they finally have a light at the end of the tunnel. Instead, they should be very, very interested to improving their work with Apple.

And just to add the ceterum censeo: I want my iTMS Switzerland (and Europe, and Japan, and...).


----------



## dlloyd (May 9, 2004)

telarium: I wasn't saying you didn't make good points, I just didn't want you to bash Apple about things that aren't their fault. And just because you want to raise a concern doesn't mean you need to do it in the fashion you did.


----------



## Randman (May 9, 2004)

Raising a concern is one thing. Going off on a wobbler is another.


----------



## soulseek (May 10, 2004)

its the record companies behind everythin. if they dare raise the prices one day...
the ppl will react.

as internet connections get faster all over the world, p2p file sharing is gettin easier.
if ppl discouraged by rediculously high prices... they choose the FREE way ...


----------



## Darkshadow (May 10, 2004)

Uh...you could get the music wherever you wanted, import it into iTunes, then put it on the iPod.  iTunes is more than just the iTMS...


----------



## Randman (May 10, 2004)

Highlighting a problem posted by rumor sites that have already been discounted by Apple and adding in personal dissatisfaction with one element and transferring such angst to other elements is hardly problem solving.
   Bringing up a complaint is good. Discussing it is fair. But perhaps you haven't seen that your comments in this thread have been quite inciteful and thus have generated the heat that you're now shrinking from.


----------



## MacMuppet (May 10, 2004)

Hey I'm neutral on this one, but wasn't 99 cents a song a loss anyway? 
I thought they were happy selling at a loss because it shifted iPods....
All I'm saying is if apple have been forced to raise the price on certain songs (when its not about profit on the actual song) then I don't see how Wal-Mart or anyone else will be able to avoid doing the same eventually. 
If Apple who are ok to sell at a loss have to increase the price anyway, then its the industry forcing them to - why would the industry ignore/let Wal-Mart off the hook?
And hey, do what you want, but if you're going to run BSD why bother with Alienware? I know they are quite high-end PCs in general terms but aren't they aimed at gamers, with any increased capability and price only worth it for the gamer?
Anyway, you seem to know what you want (I don't know why everyone weighs into people here when they announce a different opinion) but I'd rather be deaf than have to deal with WMA and the purveyors of this diseased format...


----------



## dlloyd (May 10, 2004)

Yes, Alienware computers are designed for gamers, and they are quite popular in that area


----------



## MacMuppet (May 10, 2004)

Oh and if you are looking at PC cases and cooling capabilities, have a look at RealTek, they have some awesome cases with digital thermo readouts etc, all sorts of flashy bells and whistles. Just FYI.
I have to admit that I didnt know that Alienware did servers, and the deal you got with them sounds sweet - you know you're a valued customer when the Pres turns up fro the install....


----------



## kermit64 (May 10, 2004)

> Highlight a problem, find a solution. Not highlight a problem, be attacked by everyone and their Grandmother (Happy Mother's Day) who dismiss even the slightest (and that's what it was) suggestion of a problem.


problem solving? your first post on this thread that you started was about how you had already solved the problem by using alienware servers, and you were looking into a different music player.
when you announce to the community that you have solved your problem then is the community supposed to say right on and pat you on the back?
the point of your thread was to get feed back on your solutions correct?

maybe tellarium is still reading the thread?


----------



## dlloyd (May 10, 2004)

Missed that post, whooops .

Anyway, I don't think you angered the 'iTMS' loyalists by mentioning buying a real CD. No one should fault you for that. I believe it was your mention of illegally 'stealing' the music which may have raised people's hackles. Just because the IRAA isn't 'fair' doesn't make it OK to steal.
And before even _mentioning_ fire in a crowded room, be very sure that what you are saying could not possibly be misinterpreted as meaning there actually is one .


----------



## soulseek (May 10, 2004)

i dont get what the Alienware servers have to do with iTunes prices....

i just think this guy had somethin negative to say about apple and mentioned it here, he could have started a thread... ! he is allways wellcome to do so...

iTunes prices aint goin down. they might be goin down, that would be a good idea!

but most important for me would be to have 192 AAC instead of 128 !!!

Another interesting topic is  iTMS prices in Europe.... a 1euro per song would be good... but based on todays currencies it should be less than that... anythin above 1euro would dissapoint me!!!


----------



## Giaguara (May 10, 2004)

telarium said:
			
		

> As noted on Slashdot and The Register - the price of some songs in iTunes will be upped to $1.25.



Not everything that is said in slashdot is going to happen. Not everything that is speculated in the rumor sites is going to happen either. If it was so, we would have had the video iPods on the market for over a year, the 80 GB iPod since last year, a new version of Newton, and every single show in BBC would be a free mp3 download from BBCs site.



			
				telarium said:
			
		

> Since I surely won't be paying for this anymore, I suppose I've now rendered my iPod useless (old 5 Gigger) in the legal music arena.
> 
> I had considered purchasing a new iPod to replace my older one, but now I think I'm going to take my business to one of the other MP3/WMV players out there. Any suggestions -- I'm thinking of something with a battery life longer than 10 minutes (equivalent to the amount of time my current iPod holds a charge)?



You have an iPod, so what exactly is preventing you from enjoying it? iTMS price raise, which is speculated by some flam.. slashdotters? Have you so far purchased ALL your music from iTMS? Non-US resident (and US residents without a credit card) can't use iTMS. All the British, Italian, Finnish etc etc iPod owners that I know, enjoy their iPod. Yet they have never had the option to purchase even one track from iTMS. They haven't gone all to p2ps, either.
If your iPod really lasts 10 minutes, you might want to change the battery. You can do it yourself with the instructions that were e.g. in one of the latest Macworlds [if your iPod is out of warranty and you believe in your technical skills], or have it changed - I saw some companies advertising changing the battery for new for 79 $ all included, and of course, Apple will change it too.



			
				telarium said:
			
		

> P.S. - I suppose I should add that they will be selling some albums for $16.99. I think I'll just go purchase the cd for cheaper (Wal-Mart?), and rip it to whatever format I want, without limitations.



Yes, why not do that? Many, many mac users do that. Choose the quality you want. And don't even need to backup all the music, as you own the original too. But even at Wal-Mart, Bestbuy etc, not all albums have the same price. Nothing prevents you from using them all, iTMS, Wal-Mart, Bestbuy, your local music stores ...


----------



## Randman (May 10, 2004)

I can understand anger if prices were too rise, but not when it's just rumors. That said, a very small percentage of my music comes from the iTMS and I've spent more about $200 there, if not more.
   Most of my music comes from ripping my CDs.
   Though I must agree with soulseek about needing to have a higher quality of aac.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (May 10, 2004)

Apple flat-out denies the rumor of increased iTunes Music Store pricing:

http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=41282215


----------



## telarium (May 12, 2004)

dlloyd said:
			
		

> Yes, Alienware computers are designed for gamers, and they are quite popular in that area



They also have a little-known digital video segment. 



			
				Randman said:
			
		

> But perhaps you haven't seen that your comments in this thread have been quite inciteful and thus have generated the heat that you're now shrinking from.



I suppose Drunkmac's thread was the most insightful (or should I say in*c*iteful) of all. And isn't it interesting how my last post was deleted, yet his remained? Am I not allowed to defend my decisions here? 



			
				Randman said:
			
		

> Highlighting a problem posted by rumor sites that have already been discounted by Apple and adding in personal dissatisfaction with one element and transferring such angst to other elements is hardly problem solving.



I noted the news BEFORE Apple had discounted it.

I didn't transfer my angst - I just stated Alienware, which was not further discussed until Drunkmac came along -- I admit, maybe I should have said x86, and not elaborated any further. 



			
				kermit64 said:
			
		

> the point of your thread was to get feed back on your solutions correct?



Yep. But Drunkmac started hurling accusations my way, so I'm obliged to defend myself, or at least explain _why_ I chose Alienware. 



			
				dlloyd said:
			
		

> Just because the IRAA isn't 'fair' doesn't make it OK to steal.



That's true. I apologize for that. I'm all for intellectual property rights.



			
				Soulseek said:
			
		

> i dont get what the Alienware servers have to do with iTunes prices....



I don't either, ask drunkmac...



Brad


----------



## dlloyd (May 12, 2004)

No flames please, but what was the point of that post? The thread was dead and you just brought it back up for no reason


----------



## Giaguara (May 12, 2004)

It was the drama queen part in that post that wasn't liked.


----------



## dlloyd (May 12, 2004)

You know, it just occurred to me... This thread doesn't really need to remain open, does it? It could be locked and I don't think anyone would mind.


----------

