Napster opens world’s biggest MP3 store
Napster Inc., the digital music service, on Tuesday opened the world’s biggest MP3 download store with more than 6 million songs in a direct challenge to Apple’s iTunes store. The new Web-based music store will have digital songs from all major music labels as well as thousands of independent labels. The MP3-format songs will be compatible with the vast majority of digital media devices and mobile phones including Apple’s popular iPod as well as its iPhone. Before now Napster has focused on selling all-you-can-eat monthly streaming music subscription packages but has struggled to win over the majority of fans who want to be able to transfer songs they like on to a portable device such as the market-leading iPod.
The new Napster service tries to take on Apple’s dominance in digital music by offering fans more songs without copy protection or digital rights management (DRM). Most of the six million songs on the iTunes Music store are available with Fairplay DRM, which prevents the songs from being played on most portable players other than the iPod. Major labels in particular had previously been reluctant to allow online retailers to sell their songs without protection as a way to avoid piracy. As the industry outlook gets tougher more executives are willing to experiment or take a risk. “We’re now moving from under the DRM cloud,” said Chris Gorog, Napster chief executive. “Now consumers can use Napster with any device,” he added. Most songs on the service will be available for 99 cents (50 pence) each and $9.95 an album.
Source: AP
screw napster. I get my music free thanx..
its great and all. but i think itunes music store will still definitely win this one.
might work for few countries that can’t use iTunes music store in their countries yet (especially in eu)
screw music u have 2 pay 4
MP3 ??? Stuff that, I want lossless
>>MP3 ??? Stuff that, I want lossless
Yeah, lossless is the way to go since broadband connection is available everywhere…
Screw 56Kers!!
lol. hu pays 4 ch00nz?
I hate people who insist on lossles and dis MP3 at the same time.
It will be a cold day in hell before most of you can distinguish an mp3 at 450kbp (heck even a 350kbp would stump most of you) from a lossless format like flac.
Do the pepsi challenge for yourself before spewing bile and vomit at me.
good i guess for people that acctually want to pay..
i
good too see napster back in it
screw buying mp3’s even after you’ve paid the DRM makes pretty damn sure that you don’t actually ‘own’ the music.
Napster got me into downloading stuff 8 years ago. I still remember metallica on mtv complaining about it, and trying to download as many songs as i could on my 56k connection knowing it was going to be shutdown. Such a revolutionary piece of software for its time , now turned into a boring store. At least the main idea of it lives on.
Napster was good 10 yrs back when it was underground, especially when searching for rare/classic dance tunes from the 90’s. Trouble is with these sites is that they dont offer full version mixes of underground genres, like Hard House/Trance, Scouse House etc, all of which are freely available in the right places on the net if you google correctly :).
@5 @6
Just because broadband is widely available doesn’t mean you have to waste space. Do you think most people’s ears can actually tell the difference between lossless and an efficient high quality lossy format? You’d probably need a really high-quality stereo system for that, and most people listen to downloaded songs on their iPod or other portable media player. I’d take a high quality Ogg/Vorbis file over a lossless format because a)I can download them faster and b) they take up less space.
Just because you have the space doesn’t mean you should be wasteful with it.
Re: The Lossless debate
I’ve done the test with 450k/bit mp3 and lossless file encoded from the same source and I can certainly recognise the difference. On some tracks it’s so small as to be insignificant, but on others (such as on some classical tracks that have a great dynamic range and an intricate arrangement) it is really quite noticeable. If there is a perceivable difference then there is no waste of space.
On the other hand, many people have portable music players with 8GB or less of storage. Naturally, lossless is less than ideal if you want a variety of genres available in your pocket, so the mp3 is a great compromise.
The easy solution is for stores to sell both formats. Then the audiophiles are happy, and the normal listener can fit a good library on their nano. Personally, I’d buy the flac then re-encode for my iRiver clix 2.
well, steveo, get a decent audio system or a new pair of ears. sorry that you can’t distinguish mp3 from lossless on your tiny speaker, but ppl , but you don’t have to be an audiophile to hear the difference, idiot.
@15 Nice copy/paste. What site did u find that from upmyownass.com?
@17 Whatever you say, seems totally clear your talking out of your A hole.. sometimes people like you argue and split hairs over anything no matter how small and pointless.. or maybe I just don’t have Your superman hearing, but for normal people there is no noticeable difference between high encoded and lossless. Its a fad, for people who pretend they are perfect and insist perfection, despite themselves being imperfect.
napster baaaaaad!!!!
Usher-Here_I_Stand-2008_GT4
http://rapidshare.com/files/116289838/uhis2008.tar
Apparently, #11 can’t read. It states in the article that DRM is not attached to these files. Dumbass.
Yes Grimms right… But selling mp3 music without any protection for around $1 a song or $10 for an album… is actually damn expensive if you think about it.
People might as well use amazon if they want to stay legal, might even be cheaper. My 2 cents.
care
lol @ 450kbps mp3…
Standard MP3 format only goes up to 320 kbit/s.
Unlesss you have a very good sound system or uber headphones + exceptional hearing, you won’t tell the difference between a properly(!!!) encoded 320kbit/s MP3 and lossless.
Note at properly encoded, because most people (and sadly also companies) have no idea what that means.
Look despite all the assertions that a high encoded mp3 is indistinguishable from lossless, the fact remains that mp3 is a lossy format. You are loosing something of the original when listening to an mp3. For many songs of rock/pop/electronic genres it’s true you may not hear a great difference.
I’m not trying to insult mp3s or people who listen to mp3s. But you can hear a difference with a moderately priced stereo system. I personally have AU$800 Focal speakers, with a AU$600 Panasonic digital amplifier.
My view is that artists put in a great deal of time and effort trying to make great sounding music with nuance, and I want to listen to it as they intended. If anything now we live in the digital age we might expect even higher fidelity, as music now comes direct from the studio without the degradation due to limitations of the CD.