Amazon's online music, kills iTunes...

Well...

It's cheaper, DRM free, higher bit-rate (256 kbps variable), better Album Art, compatible with any music player AND there will be a version for linux.

Not only that, but any music you download will appear in your chosen library, whether iTunes, WMP or otherwise.

With Apple upsetting a lot of publishers one by one, and consumers starting to feel walled in, the next few months could be crucial to see if iTunes holds on to its market share.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070925-amazon-launches-public-beta-of-mp3-music-store.html

This has got to be a good thing long term. I am not bashing iTunes, just promoting DRM-free music. I have never been pleased with the fact that when I buy a CD, I own it, I can rip it, I can copy it, I can do whatever I want with it. When I buy from iTunes, I can play it on iTunes or my iPod. That is it.

As DRM-free music gets more common, the music industry will eventually have to comply across the board... well, I hope so anyway.

Keep in mind that 256 MP3 is not higher quality than 128 AAC. AAC is a much better codec so a 128k AAC file will sound just as good as a 256k MP3.

Benjamindaines said:

Keep in mind that 256 MP3 is not higher quality than 128 AAC. AAC is a much better codec so a 128k AAC file will sound just as good as a 256k MP3.

Click to expand...

I've been working with Audio for years, and I know that is not correct. Even Apple's own site says 128 kbps AAC is about the same as 160kbps MP3, which is more or less accurate, IMO. Whilst on paper AAC's higher frequency range (8 - 96khz, vs 16 - 48khz) appears to support what you say, in reality in terms of subjective hearing, it doesn't bear out. Additionally, its higher compression causes more artifacting, especially in the high end.

It's also worth pointing out that the MP3 conversion in iTunes itself, is not the best. A LAME conversion is much better at lower bitrates.

I'd choose AAC over MP3 for the simple fact that you get better quality at the same file size, but now with 80 gig and higher iPODS, the file size is starting to matter less. Having said that, 128 kbps AAC is significantly poorer than a CD, and not as good as 256 kbps MP3. So given the choice, I'd take 256 kbps MP3 against a 128 kbps AAC. Having said that, iTunes plus offers 192kbps AAC... which is very high quality.

All of my CDs are ripped at 192kbps AAC, which is high enough that it's pretty tough to tell whether or not it's a CD, at least on my equipment.

Zoolook said:

Well...

It's cheaper, DRM free, higher bit-rate (256 kbps variable), better Album Art, compatible with any music player AND there will be a version for linux.

Not only that, but any music you download will appear in your chosen library, whether iTunes, WMP or otherwise.

With Apple upsetting a lot of publishers one by one, and consumers starting to feel walled in, the next few months could be crucial to see if iTunes holds on to its market share.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070925-amazon-launches-public-beta-of-mp3-music-store.html

Click to expand...

I have to agree - and to be quite honest, I'll be shopping Amazon first before I buy any new music.

With that said, I don't know that this will be a huge threat to Apple. I think a lot of people are very much accustomed to the one-click-and-done nature of iTMS, and I'm sure those folks are willing to pay an extra few cents for the convenience. Lots of people (my wife for example) could care less about the DRM, they just want to be able to easily put music on their iPods.

One thing is for sure - this will most definitely break Apple's stranglehold on the market, and will greatly reduce their leverage when contracts come due for renewal.