Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Beatles On iTunes

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the help-i-need-some-money dept.

Media (Apple) 551

Yesterday Apple put a big old teaser up on their homepage for an unknown announcement to occur today. Speculation ran rampant from the delayed iOS 4.2, to iTunes Streaming to a release of the Beatles catalog on the iTunes store. Well, it was the latter. They have 13 albums on the store now, and a $150 box set. So here's hoping that we get that iPad multitasking yet this November.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

White Album (5, Funny)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242012)

Oh, so now I've got to buy the White Album *again*?

Re:White Album (1)

ledow (319597) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242020)

Damn - beat me to it.

Re:White Album (1, Troll)

devbox (1919724) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242064)

Yeah, like wtf was this? Huge hype for absolutely nothing.

Or well, I guess Apple stills cashes in.

Re:White Album (1, Troll)

devbox (1919724) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242364)

Shareholders aren't happy either as Apple stock is dropping [marketwatch.com] .

Re:White Album (2, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242476)

I wouldn't read too much into that. Apple stock is always very volatile after each of these announcements. Lots of people either short or buy stock just before the scheduled announcement time and it takes a day or two for it to return to normal. You'll notice that the graph has a big spike just before the announcement, presumably caused by a lot of people buying in anticipation of something shiny. The dip is caused by them now selling at a loss (which is pretty stupid, because if they hung onto it they could probably sell at a profit in six months or less).

Re:White Album (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242486)

That...doesn't make any sense.

Having a band like The Beatles on iTunes should send their stock skyrocketing. The amount of money all parties involved are going to make is going to be huge. If there's one band that people rebuy over and over again, it's The Beatles.

Re:White Album (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242026)

no, you don't have to. It's just the beatles. Unless they make your panties slip an inch, enjoy it whatever way you did before.

Re:White Album (2, Funny)

TheWanderingHermit (513872) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242210)

Just the Beatles?

But this is was a world changing announcement. They've made us wait for several days and pundits have been speculating on this for all that time.

It's a big deal.

Really big.

I know, since Apple said it would change my world.

It's not like it's something trivial that won't effect most iPod or iPhone or iMac users, is it?

Re:White Album (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242042)

Nobody's holding a gun to your head, retard.

Re:White Album (3, Informative)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242058)

I'm pretty sure that was a reference to MiB.

Re:White Album (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242178)

No, it's a reference to having to buy the White album again. DUR.

Re:White Album (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242084)

...or rip it to mp3 from the cd like everyone else with an IQ over 70.

Who are the Beatles (2, Funny)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242300)

Are they some new Boy band? Sorry if I'm out of the loop, Since I got to college I haven't had time for pop music since way before Cold Play hit the scene. $150 seems like a lot for such a new band, how much music could there be?

Re:Who are the Beatles (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242360)

13 albums apparently, they must be churning this garbage out like the entire cast of pop idol combined.

Re:Who are the Beatles (1)

OldeTimeGeek (725417) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242490)

What is a Cold Play? Is that some type of sexual innuendo, like chatting up someone who doesn't like sex?

Re:White Album (1)

MoeDumb (1108389) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242452)

They want to make money? Put out the alternate takes, the bootlegs, the unreleased goodies... there is so much out there...

Life is real (0, Flamebait)

dimethylxanthine (946092) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242036)

Lennon is a genius. Living in every pore. Life is real. Life is real. Life is real, so real. Life is cruel. Life is a bitch. Life is real - so real... Queen, Hot Space.

Re:Life is real (0, Flamebait)

lxs (131946) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242462)

Last time I spoke with him, he didn't sound too clever. The six feet of dirt between us might have had something to do with that.

Big (2, Interesting)

inpher (1788434) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242044)

This is big, at least for Steve Jobs and Apple. Steve is a huge Beatles fan and the distinction between Apple and Steve Jobs is blurry at best.

Re:Big (2)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242076)

Isn't this the first time that the Beatles' catalog will be offered online? Legally of course.

Re:Big (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242430)

Depends on whether or not you count DLC for the Beatles: Rock Band game.

Re:Big (1)

Larry Lightbulb (781175) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242506)

You've been able to buy the digital music online for a long time.

Sosumi (4, Interesting)

slim (1652) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242086)

And yet there's the trademark dispute over the Apple brand, the Beatles owning Apple Corps, and Jobs having Apple Computer.

When new sounds for System 7 were created, the sounds were reviewed through Apple's legal department and they objected that the new system sound alert "chime" had a name that was "too musical", under the recent settlement. The creator of the new sound alerts for System 7 and the Macintosh Startup Sound, Jim Reekes, had grown frustrated with the legal scrutiny and first quipped it should be named "Let It Beep", a pun on The Beatles' "Let It Be". When someone remarked that that wouldn't pass legal's approval, he remarked "so sue me." After a brief reflection, he resubmitted the sound's name as sosumi (a homophone of "so sue me"), telling the legal department that the name was Japanese and had nothing to do with music.

Re:Sosumi (4, Insightful)

EvanED (569694) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242316)

And yet there's the trademark dispute over the Apple brand...

Since apparently you weren't paying attention, there was the trademark dispute but it was permanently resolved [appleinsider.com] years ago.

(BTW it's amusing that you use the sosumi example instead of when they later sued when Apple started iTunes -- which I felt they actually had a solid basis on which to stand.)

Re:Sosumi (3, Informative)

slim (1652) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242362)

Twas a piece of historical trivia.

And the Sosumi anecdote is funny, whereas the iTunes bit is not.

If you don't already.... (2, Interesting)

Slash.Poop (1088395) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242056)

If you don't already own every Beatles album, I feel sorry for you.

Re:If you don't already.... (5, Insightful)

Raumkraut (518382) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242108)

Meh. The Beatles are overrated.

Re:If you don't already.... (4, Insightful)

slim (1652) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242192)

Meh. The Beatles are overrated.

I tend to agree, but only because they are so very, very, unquestioningly highly rated by so many.

It's also easy to dismiss them, as an overreaction to the adulation. Your post underrates them.

A few hours with Beatles Rock Band (which is a great motivator for attentive listening) will remind you that they *were* very good indeed.

Re:If you don't already.... (1, Insightful)

Fallus Shempus (793462) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242388)

A few hours with Beatles Rock Band

And this is the extent of your musical knowledge, no wonder you like the Beatles.

I find their music uninteresting and the hype annoying.

Re:If you don't already.... (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242478)

I'm not a huge Beatles fan but I'm very tempted to get Beatles Rock Band for Day Tripper alone. I guess the thing with the Beatles is, while you might not like every song they did (although some people clearly do), they had a hell of a lot of variety in their catalogue so there's pretty much something for everyone.

Re:If you don't already.... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242264)

Not overrated, but played to death and embraced by mainstream society to the point that any rock-and-roll rebellion aspect is gone.

Re:If you don't already.... (3, Insightful)

paiute (550198) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242292)

I liked many of their songs the first 200,000 times I heard them.

Re:If you don't already.... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242342)

To be fair, no band could live up to the hype the Beatles get. Not even the Kinks.

Re:If you don't already.... (2, Interesting)

ProppaT (557551) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242384)

Agreed. I think the Beatles inspiration at the time is worth a hell of a lot more than their music.

* - Paul pushed Badfinger and basically kick starting the Power Pop genre
* - Lennon inspired Harry Nilsson to release some absolutely classic albums
* - They acted as a think tank for George Harrison. George Harrison's All Things Must Pass is worth more than the collective whole of the Beatles catalog, imo
* - Basically caused Brian Wilson to go nuts. We wouldn't have Pet Sounds or Smile without the Beatles.
* - Without the Beatles we wouldn't have The Monkees. Without The Monkees, Michael Nesmith probably wouldn't have had a solo career. Michael Nesmith basically stands in equal footing with Graham Parsons as far as creating the Alt Country genre. You can think of Michael Nesmith and Graham Parsons as the 70s versions of Jay Farrar and Jeff Tweedy as far as Alt Country importance goes.

You can't deny the impact they had at the time, although you can debate the merits of a lot of their catalog until you're blue in the face.

Re:If you don't already.... (1)

east coast (590680) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242546)

Don't forget Chuck Manson. Their works helped to spawn the Manson family. Helter Skelter and all that.

Re:If you don't already.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242408)

Your mother is overrated. Sorry sorry, I meant your comment is overrated. Seriously, it is.

Re:If you don't already.... (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242120)

Every note the Beatles played isn't sacred. They were a good band. Some of their music still holds up well. But they're not Gods. Most of their stuff is pretty forgetable. Your music taste isn't any better than the next guys except for in your own mind. Get over yourself.

Re:If you don't already.... (3, Insightful)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242200)

Why, because we didn't buy into their self absorbed crying about how their 'art' should be sold.

They aren't that good, seriously. When people and companies think they are so special that they will not allow you to buy something in an alternate form when there is massive demand because they are greedy self entitled fucks ... you should probably shop elsewhere so they get the point. Of course its too late for that, so instead you're just going to keep getting ripped off by paying $130 for a boxed set that costs them literally $5 to make, or $150 that cost them $0.05 to let you download.

At this point, anyone who buys anything Beatles related is rather retarded for doing so.

Re:If you don't already.... (4, Insightful)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242206)

If you don't already own every Beatles album, I feel sorry for you.

Does borrowing your grandfathers copies count? They are interesting, but with the cultural reference points being half a century ago, they are kind of hard to relate to like the kids half a century related to them. One of those "you had to be there" moments.

Re:If you don't already.... (5, Funny)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242224)

That's not really true, though. Every generation has its superstars.

The Beatles are just your grandpa's Justin Bieber.

Re:If you don't already.... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242428)

We'll make that comparison if Justin Bieber is still as popular in ten years and actually does something to advance music. I'm guessing that the machine will have chewed him up and spit him out long before then, but he won't care because he'll still be rich as hell.

Re:If you don't already.... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242466)

"The Beatles are just your grandpa's Justin Bieber."

You have lived up to your Slashdot ID.

Re:If you don't already.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242318)

I completely disagree. You don't even need to listen to the lyrics to like the Beatles. The music itself is very interesting, and quite catchy. On another note, how old are you that your grandfather listens to the Beatles?

Re:If you don't already.... (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242366)

Indeed. I don't begrudge anyone their musical tastes, and there are some older songs (I wouldn't go as far as older "bands", but a few songs sure) that I do like, but as someone who grew up afterwards, I just don't "get it".

They're just an old band. I like Lennon's solo "Imagine", but beyond that I can't think of a single song they've involved with that I actually like.

Music, like so many things, is subjective, and largely generational, and their day has pretty much passed. My parents always find those opinions odd, but oh well. They still can't believe I don't like Elvis either :).

Re:If you don't already.... (1)

Kenshin (43036) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242374)

"They are interesting, but with the cultural reference points being half a century ago, they are kind of hard to relate to like the kids half a century related to them."

There aren't all that many cultural reference points in Beatles songs. The lyrics are pretty-much timeless. That's part of how they managed to stay so popular.

It's sorta like Pixar.

Re:If you don't already.... (1)

mspohr (589790) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242404)

I already have MP3s of most of the Beatles. Am I supposed to get excited about this?

Good, but overrated products (5, Interesting)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242072)

In a way, Apple and The Beatles are very similar. Both were pioneers in their industries. Both had throngs of loyal fans willing to do anything for them. Both are scarcely more than a thin veneer over the status quo.

It's a bit poetic that these two entities which have been at each other's throats over who has the right to call themselves a fruit now are hand in hand making money off the panting masses.

Apple's done it again.

Re:Good, but overrated products (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242326)

Have to argue with you there. The Beatles and Apple, to a lesser degree, changed the status quo. The fact that the status quo hasn't changed since is testament to their talent.

Re:Good, but overrated products (1)

mevets (322601) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242346)

There is a market for John Brauer designed wastebaskets, which may not be any better at holding waste than a cardboard box lined with wax paper.

Sipping shade grown free trade coffee while listening to the Beatles on your i-thing is a straw man. Toss it in your wax-paper lined cardboard box.

Re:Good, but overrated products (5, Insightful)

gad_zuki! (70830) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242434)

>Both are scarcely more than a thin veneer over the status quo.

Oh, I wouldn't say that about the Beatles. If you look at the Beatles peers when they were active you'll see that they weren't just "white plastic on OEM crap." Lets skip past their early stuff which is admittingly cookie cutter to Rubber Soul's release in 1965. The Billboard top 100 had acts like Sonny and Cher and songs like "Wooley Bully." Or when the Beatles released Revolver in 1966, the charts were leading with stuff like the Mamas and Papas. Sgt Peppers was released in 1967 when the Billboards top song was stuff like I'm A Believer by the Monkees. Its weird to even think of them as competing peers considering how far and away Sgt Peppers is from anything mainstream release.

I think the Beatles really earned their reputation as game changers. They're one of the first rock bands to really begin exploring outside the mainstream, challenge the status quo, and succeeding at this without alienating listeners. Its odd to think that by 1969 they were pretty much done, but if you listen to a lot of the music from the 1970s you'll hear quite a bit of Beatles influence. I think they really wrote the template on how to make rock music that isn't just disposable catchy hits and could be something closer to fine art than just music to dance/get high/get laid to.

Cheaper to buy CDs (5, Insightful)

LordKronos (470910) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242074)

Meanwhile, the CD box set is selling for $130 on amazon (and I thought I read recently someone was offering it for around $100). I thought downloads were supposed to be cheaper than the physical CDs.

Re:Cheaper to buy CDs (3, Informative)

SicariusMan (412699) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242106)

I don't know about the CD set, but the iTunes version has the iTunes LP extras including two of their original concerts. I'm not a Beatles guy at all, as I'm under 35, but I do respect the influence they've had on music.

Re:Cheaper to buy CDs (5, Funny)

onion2k (203094) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242396)

I'm not a Mozart guy at all. I'm under 250 years old.

Re:Cheaper to buy CDs (1)

n4f (1473103) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242124)

I've never had that impression. I thought it cost around $9.99 to download most complete albums off of itunes (I'm guessing I don't use itumes). I can pay this for most albums on amazon.com to get the physical disc + album art - DRM.

Re:Cheaper to buy CDs (2, Informative)

Sygnus (83325) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242494)

I've never had that impression. I thought it cost around $9.99 to download most complete albums off of itunes (I'm guessing I don't use itumes). I can pay this for most albums on amazon.com to get the physical disc + album art - DRM.

iTunes music hasn't had DRM for several years.

Re:Cheaper to buy CDs (4, Insightful)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242194)

Downloads are really supposed to be more convenient than CDs. Brick and mortar stores do not have 24/7 hours. Online CD stores will take at least a day to ship. There is no worry about supply limits. And you can get the songs you want rather than the whole album. With a large number of albums like the box set, you don't have to spend any time ripping and encoding to your computer. Truthfully downloads are cheaper to manufacture than CDs. However markup is always affected by demand and consumer willingness to pay for convenience. I myself get CDs whenever possible but I usually get them used.

Re:Cheaper to buy CDs (1)

melikamp (631205) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242560)

There is no worry about supply limits.

I don't think the rent seekers... Ugm, the rights holders got that memo. They seem to be dangerously preoccupied with supply limits of digital media: how there ain't any.

Re:Cheaper to buy CDs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242232)

I thought downloads were supposed to be cheaper than the physical CDs.

Just because it costs less money to deliver downloads, doesn't mean they can't charge the same or more. Look at video game downloads for the PC for example, same price as the physical version on release and often more expensive for slightly older games.

It's not the store's fault but the publisher's, I guess.

Re:Cheaper to buy CDs (2, Insightful)

Damien Clauzel (1831286) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242252)

$150 in iTunes US, and 149€ in iTunes France for the CD Box Set?

Damn you Apple and your currency rate! $1 != 1€, and the music files are the same all around the planet.

Re:Cheaper to buy CDs (1)

inpher (1788434) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242510)

Perhaps some sales tax? But even then $150 = €110 and 110*1.2 = 132. Makes little sense to keep it that different.

Don't for get the sound engineer (1)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242368)

Meanwhile, the CD box set is selling for $130 on amazon (and I thought I read recently someone was offering it for around $100). I thought downloads were supposed to be cheaper than the physical CDs.

SUre you could get the box set and then rip them with a free ripper. Or you could pay a team of professional sound engineers $20 to work for months getting the perfect rip for you.

Re:Don't for get the sound engineer (4, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242414)

And if I was an "audiophile" and cared about the pixie dust, I might care. Back in the real world, 90% of human beings won't be able to tell the difference between that rip that the "professional sound engineers" spent "months" on (which I highly doubt in the first place), and your 196Kbps rip using CDEX + LAME.

Re:Cheaper to buy CDs (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242376)

I thought downloads were supposed to be cheaper than the physical CDs.

Why would you think that? Because distribution costs are virtually nil, as every torrent site on the Internet amply demonstrates?

Corporations are going to be selling your own culture back to you for the rest of your life. The baby boomers aren't going to live to see the copyright expire on Beatles songs. They will be paying for the Forrest Gump soundtrack from their retirement homes.

Re:Cheaper to buy CDs (1)

melikamp (631205) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242472)

They are. There is a flac discography blob floating around, a remastered 2009 version. The best part, everything you pay for it ($0) goes directly to John Lennon.

Re:Cheaper to buy CDs (2, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242538)

I thought downloads were supposed to be cheaper than the physical CDs

Clearly you are new to the iTunes store.

You could almost get the vinyl (1)

copponex (13876) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242568)

A decent new turntable with a built-in preamp is only $80. Assuming you already have speakers somewhere, you can head down to your local record store and pick up some Beatles reprints at $10 a pop. It won't give you their whole catalog for under $150, but it will give you the best albums and better sound.

If you like classic rock, you haven't heard it until you've spun it on vinyl. For music produced after 1995 it's usually useless, since it was cut digitally.

Why is this news? (1)

n4f (1473103) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242078)

Digital music store releases a new (old) digital product? This is their huge announcement?

Apples needs to get over themselves.

Re:Why is this news? (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242278)

Maybe because no one else has downloadable Beatles content yet?

Re:Why is this news? (1)

greenbobb (1869506) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242358)

You mean no one else has legal downloadable Beatles content...

Re:Why is this news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242380)

Maybe because no one else has downloadable Beatles content yet?

Nope, can't download it anywhere yet.

http://btjunkie.org/torrent/The-Beatles-Discography-FLAC/448615e942cb0a805fee0a71f508b708cffa77885d89 (btjunkie.org)

Attention Steve: (0, Flamebait)

Adolf Hipster (1486687) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242082)

Nobody gives a crap about the Beatles anymore. They broke up 40 years ago.

Who cares? (4, Insightful)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242142)

Perhaps I just don't like the Beatles enough to think this is a good thing ... but ...

My solution to bands who 'refuse' to be put on iTunes, for any reason?

I don't buy their shit. I won't buy anything from the Beatles or Metallica ever again for that reason, even if they change their minds later.

You guys go cater to their self absorbed temper tantrums and sense of entitlement. I'll pass and buy things from people who actually appreciate my money.

Re:Who cares? (-1, Troll)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242420)

My take on "who cares" is the fact that ripping CDs is a trivial thing if you're already part of the Apple cult.

It's a trivial thing in general.

What's the point really? The privelege of being able to pay Apple again for something you already own in a digital format?

There isn't even any nasty DRM or DMCA to get in your way with an audio CD.

Re:Who cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242514)

I could be wrong, but I don't think the Beatles refused to be put on iTunes. The Beatles didn't exist when iTunes was created first off, secondly they didn't (and currently don't) even own their own music, and third the most important Beatle wasn't even ALIVE so I doubt he was refusing the songs release on Apple's store.

So why weren't the song on iTunes?? Because those big media companies you apparently love (I only buy it if it's on iTunes!!) didn't want it on there. The same companies who you already have likely purchased dozens or hundreds of other songs from.

I guess the joke is on you.

Just like the announcement (2, Insightful)

Lev13than (581686) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242156)

O frabjous day!

The Beatles are on iTunes! Truly this is a day that we "will never forget [slashgear.com] ".

Move over 7/25/2006 (remember - the day that Metallica finally joined the fold?), because 11/16/2010 is the new biggest day in the history of music. Ever.
 
Remember folks, your task for this morning is to delete the 100-200 Beatles songs in your iTunes folder so that you can download the exact same files from Apple.

Or you can download them for free (1, Redundant)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242166)

Why would anyone give iTunes and Apple and the Beatles for that matter any more money?

I have already owned these as albums, tapes and CDs and I am NOT buying them again.

Re:Or you can download them for free (2, Insightful)

MouseR (3264) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242444)

Who says you have to? Do you feel pressured when a car company announces the current year`s model?

How about the autumn release of Levis jeans?

Heck... that pint of milk is dépassé by now. RUSH NOW to buy this week`s release!! ... or just realize you made a short-sighted comment and move on.

Interview question: (1)

fishbowl (7759) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242176)

Interview question:

"Beatles or Stones?"

Meh (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242180)

This is their big announcement? Why should I care about whether I can buy music by some old hippies on iTunes, particularly when it's been available in a plethora of other formats for 30 years? Answer: I don't!

great! (0)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242196)

where's the .torrent?

*Sigh*... (4, Insightful)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242218)

It's a testament to baby boomer narcissism that this is such a BFD from Apple.

Big new software update? No. Verizon iPhone? No. ZOMG U CAN HAZ BEETULZ ON TEH iPhone NOW!

If Disney opened up its vault, that'd at least make sense since they stop publishing a lot of their animated classics for long periods of time.

Jobs' Narcissism (4, Interesting)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242382)

Actually, this announcement's hype is testament to Steve Jobs' narcissism, and whatever is the corporate version of "narcissism" (monopolism?) over at Apple Records. Apple Records has been suing and attacking Apple Computer since the Apple ][, claiming "trademark" rights that don't exist (computers aren't music, even when computers play or sell music). "Beatles on iTunes" closes the "Apple vs Apple" spat that has kept Beatles music from Apple users for so long, even when it there was no possible combo. Which is probably a lot bigger deal to Jobs and Apple Records than it is to the public, even if Apple's music distribution is #1 and the Beatles recordings are still among the most popular music in the world.

Because Steve Jobs is a Baby Boomer whose narcissism crossed with Apple Records' narcissism is bigger than even the narcissism of the entire rest of the "Me Generation".

Re:*Sigh*... (1)

loutr (626763) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242480)

ZOMG U CAN HAZ BEETULZ ON TEH iPhone NOW!

No, you can now *buy* the Beatles on teh iPhone. You could get them on the device from day 1, provided you had ripped your Beatles CDs or illegally dowloaded the mp3s.

Big announcement? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242238)

Why is this such a big deal? Its more expensive to buy these digital copies than to actually get album art, a box set, and perfect audio. This is hype for absolutely nothing new.

Re:Big announcement? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242356)

But but ... it's the Apples and the Beatle! They are teh speshuls!

Apple Hype (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242254)

Apple is a leader in hyping announcements, but usually they actually deliver something that is interesting. It is precisely because of this that they continue to impress, however if we see too many over-hyped announcements which really amount to nothing their credibility will drop and people will stop paying attention. In terms of image and credibility this is on the level of antenna-gate. Yesterday Apple told us that our world (from their perspective) was about to change and they failed to deliver anything of substance.

Wait... (2, Funny)

orphiuchus (1146483) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242268)

Doesn't like half the money go to Michael Jackson's ghost or something? I guess its not a bad thing, hes going to need good heaven-lawyers to get out of the charges of molesting the Lindbergh baby.

too late (1)

batistuta (1794636) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242302)

by now, most people who wanted it so badly to be willing to pay 150 dollar for it have probably downloaded it illegally already.

Re:too late (2, Informative)

east coast (590680) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242352)

Most people who wanted the Beatles catalog have probably owned it on CD for over 20 years and have already ripped it to their iPods.

While this is going to be a big stir for Apple, the truth of the matter is that most of the money they make from this is only going to be for the al a carte type crowd. I'm sure they will sell a ton of complete collections too but let's be honest; if you're over 25 and you don't own the Beatles stuff that you like? You're probably not going to buy whole albums here either....

Unless you're a total gimp who doesn't know how to rip a CD.

Lame non-news (2, Insightful)

airfoobar (1853132) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242314)

This is only news because the rights holders have been unable to make a rational business decision for such a long time, while the fans have been forced to cater to their own needs. It's much more interesting to know that the Beatles recordings will start entering the public domain in 2012.

Re:Lame non-news (1)

east coast (590680) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242460)

It's much more interesting to know that the Beatles recordings will start entering the public domain in 2012.

Where?

space exploration vs itunes (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242336)

Sad when a story about the second time ever we've returned material from space, that was posted before this one, has fewer comments and interest than yet another itunes story, even on a supposed tech website. We're not what we were. What happened to us, we were trying for the stars once...

Re:space exploration vs itunes (1, Offtopic)

east coast (590680) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242426)

Science discussions on Slashdot are teh suck.

Sorry, but it's true. Just go read down the posts about the 30 year old black hole... half of them say the same thing, about half of what's left is trolls. Slashdot isn't a science site. It's hardly a tech site anymore. Only about 1 in 100 posts actually deserve the Insightful mod for technical/science information.

Currency Conversion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242348)

$150 = 150€ ? :-(

Big Deal to Steve Jobs. Trivial to the rest of us. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242354)

To him, this is an accomplishment that took a very long time and alot of meetings.

To me, this is something I downloaded years ago on bit torrent.

I love apple products but I'm gonna go out on a limb and yell forcefield of mega-pr on this one.

Let me explain how the world works. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242438)

As it seems the record labels still have yet to figure this out. Weeks ago, I wanted to buy The Beatles albums. I went to iTunes. Nothing. I went to Amazon. CD only. This music I wanted for the road trip I was about to take. The solution? BitTorrent. High quality audio. Outstanding album art. Very little work cleaning metadata. Had this music been available on iTunes then, I would have paid for it.

Great! (0, Troll)

NtwoO (517588) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242454)

Another reason not to use iTunes!! YAY!

Steve Jobs lives in a dream.... (1)

anotheryak (1823894) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242552)

Steve Jobs was working, writing the words of his Beatles cat-a-log victory
part of his Apple Music lawsuit his-tory.
For years he kept working,
Buying the rights to those songs while he pulled out his hair
but now we don't care.

All the the massive egos,
Where do they all belong?
All the massive egos,
Redmond and Cu-per-tin-o.

In comparison, I'm more excited... (4, Funny)

CHK6 (583097) | more than 3 years ago | (#34242566)

I understand Steve Job's labor of love to sell Beatles songs on iTunes is some crown jewel and huge news for Apple. But I find it much much more exciting that the Quick-Mart gas station on the corner fixed it's slushee machine.

Someone's gotta say it ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34242584)

... fuck the Beatles.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?