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!

Google Working To Launch Music Store Soon

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the everybody's-doing-it dept.

Google 66

afabbro writes with news that Google is working to follow up its cloud music service with an MP3 store capable of competing with Amazon and Apple. The NY Times reports that "According to numerous music executives, Google is eager to open the store in the next several weeks," but it's unclear "whether Google would be able to close the necessary deals with labels and music publishers in time to open a full-service store." The Wall Street Journal confirms in its own (paywalled) report that negotiations with Warner, Universal, and Sony are still a long way from resulting a deal.

cancel ×

66 comments

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

Team up with ubuntu (1)

recrudescence (1383489) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723404)

Shouldn't they just team up with ubuntu and build a proper shop, as opposed to just adding to the confusion out there? http://xkcd.com/927/ [xkcd.com]

Ubuntu, like Firefox, may be on its way out. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37723542)

If there's one thing that we can learn from the entire history of OSS, it's that projects that don't meet the needs of real users die a quick death.

XFree86 is a prime example of this. It was almost universally used, but bad decisions were made, the community started getting fucked over, and shortly afterward Xorg became the preeminent open source windowing system. XFree86 is a mere shadow of its former self.

The same thing is now happening with Firefox. It was the most popular open source browser for a number of years. But the developers have gone stupid with recent decisions. The version numbering has been royally fucked up, to the point of being misleading. Releases have been breaking extensions constantly. UI designers, rather than software developers, have been deciding on the user interface, and this has absolutely destroyed its usability (designers can make things look "pretty", but they rarely make them usable at the same time). Critical bugs, performance issues, and memory consumption issues haven't been resolved, even after years, and they're often denied outright, although they are very prevalent and affect a huge percentage of users. Due to all of these factors, Firefox users are fleeing to better browsers like Chrome, Opera, Safari, and even recent versions of IE. If the Firefox crew doesn't get its act together, Firefox will be irrelevant within a couple of years.

Ubuntu is heading down the same path. It became popular because it was useful to a lot of people. It took the power of Debian, but simplified it. However, there have been some blatantly bad decisions made during recent releases. The situation isn't as bad as with Firefox, but it's getting close. There has been too much focus on useless "cloud" functionality, and the use of Unity was a huge mistake in every respect. Now people are fleeing Ubuntu to other Linux distros as quickly as they can.

So it wouldn't be wise for Google to partner with Ubuntu. Everything is looking like Ubuntu might become the next Mandrake Linux; once widely used, but now almost completely irrelevant.

Re:Ubuntu, like Firefox, may be on its way out. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37723786)

better browsers like Chrome

Is that even a web-browser? More like a client for Google services to me. And it' UI looks like a horrible crap, far worse than a Firefox one. I seriously doubt it's popularity is based on actual features and if it wasn't backed up by a huge internet corporation owning the most popular search engine and YouTube, we'd even know of it's existence.
And that is also the reason for people migrating: they once saw an ad for Firefox and try, now they see ads for Chrome all over the place. There is no way changes to the actual browser could cause this soon enough. Lots of people still like Firefor for extensions and such, those are their loyal user base.

Ubuntu might become the next Mandrake Linux; once widely used, but now almost completely irrelevant

Mandrake was a great distro for beginners in the past, it was never widely used actually as linux was almost unknown to general public at that time.

Re:Ubuntu, like Firefox, may be on its way out. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37724088)

better browsers like Chrome

Is that even a web-browser?

Um, yes?

More like a client for Google services to me.

All of the web browsers have that function. Which is great because Google's services are fantastic and millions of people use them every day.

And it' UI looks like a horrible crap

Thank you for your opinion. My opinion and the opinion of many people is that it looks great, makes excellent use of screen real estate, and is one of the many reasons Chrome is the single fastest growing browser in userbase.

I seriously doubt it's popularity is based on actual features

How would you know? Not to mention the fact that if you think features is the end-all be-all of popularity in technology, you haven't been paying attention.

And that is also the reason for people migrating: they once saw an ad for Firefox and try, now they see ads for Chrome all over the place. There is no way changes to the actual browser could cause this soon enough. Lots of people still like Firefor for extensions and such, those are their loyal user base.

Nice theory. I have another one. Chrome is quite simply less glitchy and a whole lot faster. When Mozilla and MS can match that, Google might have something to worry about. And, no, MS' bullshit html5 demos do not mean IE is faster than Chrome. Use both side by side and you will see their claims are laughable at best.

Re:Ubuntu, like Firefox, may be on its way out. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37729350)

My opinion and the opinion of many people

My point was that is just might be biased ;-)

All of the web browsers have that function.

True, my point was that Chrome's main features are js performance and trying to get rid of the UI. IMHO, that is not what most people want. The web is still about browsing pages and not yet about web-applications. That is what I was trying to point out. That is why performance is not that critical and even stability. At the price of each tab is a different process it's still irrelevant to most people.

less glitchy

False. For a product that includes a Flash-plugin which you are unable to turn off that is an utter bullshit.

And, no, MS' bullshit html5 demos do not mean IE is faster than Chrome. Use both side by side and you will see their claims are laughable at best.

True.

Re:Team up with ubuntu (1)

Hotweed Music (2017854) | more than 2 years ago | (#37724044)

It's not a standard, it's a product. Irrelevant xkcd.

Re:Team up with ubuntu (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 2 years ago | (#37725488)

Shouldn't they just team up with ubuntu and build a proper shop, as opposed to just adding to the confusion out there?

What motivation would Google have to team up with Ubuntu? Setting aside servers - since they're irrelevant to this discussion - Linux (of all flavors) has only a tiny piece of the desktop user market. I realize that group is probably disproportionately represented here on Slashdot... but I assume Google is looking to compete in the wider world.

So who are they going to buy? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37723426)

Any guesses as to which company they buy and just relabel it as google music?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Google [wikipedia.org]

Re:So who are they going to buy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37725348)

That's what I've been waiting for. I wish it wasn't Google. The service the provide to their product (users, not the ad buyers) sucks. I'd love to see labels that paid royalties to bands. That's labels both indie and major. Hardly anyone actually pays royalties.

hey look everyone, a music store! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37723442)

because that hasn't been done already....yawn

hey look everyone, competition! (1)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 2 years ago | (#37724200)

This is a good thing!

Re:hey look everyone, a music store! (1)

Stewie241 (1035724) | more than 2 years ago | (#37725108)

Indeed... we should discourage competition. No company should ever endeavour to do something that has already been done.

Re:hey look everyone, a music store! (1)

iamhassi (659463) | more than 2 years ago | (#37725434)

And doesn't Apple already have some exclusive deals? iTunes accounted for 28% of all US Music sales May 2010, more than Walmart, and that number is likely higher now. [gigaom.com]

Walmart use to weld significant influence over the music industry, telling them to lower prices [rollingstone.com] and even forcing artists to change lyrics that Walmart found "objectionable" and that was when Walmart sold only 20% of the nation's music. [pbs.org] With iTunes at 28% they have even more power, and I imagine if Apple said "do not put your music on Google's music store" how can you say no to the company responsible for 28% of your income? If Apple was smart they would have put in their TOS long ago something that says if you sell your music on iTunes you can not sell it by any other digital distribution method.

Re:hey look everyone, a music store! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37726324)

That's the stupidest idea ever, especially if you don't want to be convicted of being a monopolist. Apple doesn't care about digital music sales. It doesn't make them very much money, but they needed to ensure that people could easily get music on their iPods, which did make Apple a lot of money. Now that digital music is sold DRM-free pretty much everywhere, there's no real need for Apple to keep their online music store around, but it makes them a small bit of money on the side and provides a convenient way for iOS users to get music.

As far as digital music goes, Apple has generally acted in the consumers interest far more than they've acted in their own.

Will it take over your system? (2)

ElmoGonzo (627753) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723532)

It won't be a complete competitor with iToons unless it requires you to install the Google Music Player, the Google Video Player, and grabs all the file associations in your system.

Re:Will it take over your system? (4, Interesting)

plover (150551) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723598)

gTewns also needs to alter the GUI to follow some other platform's specs, including non-standard key bindings and unlabeled controls. It should store all of its settings in a hidden folder somewhere on your drive that you won't accidentally find. It should take copies of your existing music files, rename them to random characters, and stick them in a different folder so you can double your backup space requirements. It should also upload periodic updates to your Android phone, just in case it got accidentally hacked. For that matter, it should install a tool to update itself that helps fill the system tray with extra useless icons, and that tool should always reinstall itself just in case you accidentally disabled it.

Re:Will it take over your system? (1)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723614)

I've never used itunes but that sounds terrible. Why would anyone use itunes if that is the case?

Re:Will it take over your system? (1)

the_other_chewey (1119125) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723642)

I've never used itunes but that sounds terrible. Why would anyone use itunes if that is the case?

Because it's the only reliable way to interface with all those iThings people apparently want to have.

Re:Will it take over your system? (1)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723654)

ah I didn't think about that. I have never bought any media player, tablet, or phone that I couldn't simply mount as a mass storage device.

Re:Will it take over your system? (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723850)

No it's not. My iPod works just fine on Linux where iTunes isn't available.

Re:Will it take over your system? (1)

unixisc (2429386) | more than 2 years ago | (#37724006)

What do you use to access your iPod on Linux? More precisely, how do you manage the contents - song sequences, and the like?

Re:Will it take over your system? (1)

happylight (600739) | more than 2 years ago | (#37724136)

And what happens when there's an iOS update? What happens when you get a new ipod every year?

People who keep up with buying all the iStuff as soon as they come out won't have to deal with 3rd party software.

Re:Will it take over your system? (3, Insightful)

the_other_chewey (1119125) | more than 2 years ago | (#37724188)

I knew someone would object and bring up gtkpod/libgpod. I had a paragraph
about that in my reply's first draft, but replaced all of it with the word "reliable".

Yes, libgpod works well on the devices it supports.

It took ages (close to two years) for gtkpod to support the 5th gen nano, for example.
The 6th gen nano is still unsupported today, nearly 14 months after its launch.

So, go on, tell people they have to wait for over a year if they want to use their shiny
new iThing without iTunes. Good luck.

Re:Will it take over your system? (2)

toddmbloom (1625689) | more than 2 years ago | (#37729770)

Because it's not terrible. People are just, once again, using rhetoric with irrational hatred of a product.

iTunes is fine.

Re:Will it take over your system? (1)

shoehornjob (1632387) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723656)

It won't be a complete competitor with iToons unless it requires you to install the Google Music Player, the Google Video Player, and grabs all the file associations in your system.

Lets not forget automatically loading programs on startup even though you specifically disabled them. OOO and also constantly pestering you to download the latest version of your worthless browser every time there is an update. Yeah @$%#%$^ you Apple.

Re:Will it take over your system? (2)

aitan (948581) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723746)

It won't be a complete competitor with iToons unless it requires you to install the Google Music Player, the Google Video Player, and grabs all the file associations in your system.

Lets not forget automatically loading programs on startup even though you specifically disabled them. OOO and also constantly pestering you to download the latest version of your worthless browser every time there is an update. Yeah @$%#%$^ you Apple.

Google is already quite good at pushing their browser as a side-install along with many unrelated products even of third party companies and you'll be lucky if you can get through the day without visiting some sites (as long as you're not using AdBlock Plus) and being offered to speed at greater speed thanks to Chrome.

And it will inject another plugin into Firefox just in case you did found out how to remove the previous one.

Re:Will it take over your system? (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723864)

It installs everything it needs to perform all the functionality you need for your purchases. But if it has taken over your file associations then you probably did something wrong. I never had that problem when I've had to use iTunes.

Re:Will it take over your system? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37726020)

It installs everything it needs to perform all the functionality you need for your purchases. But if it has taken over your file associations then you probably were paying attention. I never noticed that problem when I've had to use iTunes.

FTFY.

Re:Will it take over your system? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37764048)

It needs to install Safari for your purchases?

No Direction (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37723588)

Google is scrambling for something good and all they can think of doing is what everyone else is doing, with a slight twist. Look at Google+ and their attempt to push Facebook and others out of business because they have "the name". Thankfully, it doesn't seem like it's working, at least not as expected so, now they realize they're missing out on the music end of things and think they can just, jump in on a whim, show up at the party and get everyone to go back to their place.

I hope people are smarter than this. Don't fall for this, please.
Support those who were on the scene first, not mighty Google coming in for the steal.

Re:No Direction (1)

Kozz (7764) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723616)

I hope people are smarter than this. Don't fall for this, please.
Support those who were on the scene first, not mighty Google coming in for the steal.

The market usually supports those who provide the best product to the consumer. "Seniority" carries little weight.

Re:No Direction (1)

foniksonik (573572) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723652)

Apple has proven this multiple times and failed as many times.

Re:No Direction (1)

Kozz (7764) | more than 2 years ago | (#37724224)

Yes, that's what I was alluding to. You'll notice I used several conditionals in my statements, and no absolutes. My primary point was that it's silly to assume that "first one there" should be the de facto leader/winner/whatever. :)

Re:No Direction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37723736)

The market usually supports those who provide the best product to the consumer. "Seniority" carries little weight.

Is that why Microsoft dominates the Desktop OS market? I wish things were that simple. Survival of the best product providers is a very 'laissez-faire' concept that sits right up there along with the idea of the 'perfectly rational and unemotional hand of the free maket' but in the Music/Movie business and parts of the software industry 'survival of the fittest' type market laws do not apply. That's just as much due to the fact that the big players make sure that these law do not apply as it is due to the fact that people tend to stick with what they know even if there is a better alternative because they are reluctant to learn a new platform. Wrestling PC users away from Windows isn't easy and the same will probably apply to the iTunes/iPod/iPhone/iPad package. Anybody who makes use of Apple's stores and has invested a sizable amount of money in media and apps can't easily migrate to Android without writing off either all or at least a significant portion of his/her investment. The same basically goes for Android, if you have sunk a few hundred dollars into media and apps from the Google stores that you can't easily take with you, your'e not moving to iOS or Windows Phone any time soon. It's all about lock-in. Of course if you pirate all your stuff you won't care but nobody makes money off of pirated stuff so pirates don't really enter into this discussion since they are parasites, not sources of revenue.

Re:No Direction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37724042)

TL;DR
Do you really believe MS controls the Desktop OS market because of Seniority?

The same basically goes for Android, if you have sunk a few hundred dollars into media and apps from the Google stores that you can't easily take with you, your'e not moving to iOS or Windows Phone any time soon. It's all about lock-in.

Really bad example. We're talkting what, a $100 here? I seriously doubt that will prevent anyone from migrating. It's the lack of those apps that matter. And that is the reason no one is migrating to Android — NO APPS.

Re:No Direction (1)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 2 years ago | (#37724340)

And that is the reason no one is migrating to Android â" NO APPS.

Uh, are we talking about the same Android that is number one worldwide in smartphones, is the fastest growing OS percentagewise period, and has an app store brimming with hundreds of thousands of applications in addition to the other many thousands of applications that aren't in the regular Google Market? That's the one you are saying has "NO APPS"? How is the weather on whatever planet you live on?

Re:No Direction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37729476)

Uh, are we talking about the same Android that is number one worldwide in smartphones, is the fastest growing OS percentagewise period

Yes.

and has an app store brimming with hundreds of thousands of applications in addition to the other many thousands of applications that

Oh, my bad. No.

and has an app store brimming with hundreds of thousands of applications in addition to the other many thousands of applications that

No. Definitelly no.

Re:No Direction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37723662)

Actually Google+ did better than anyone in Google expected and Facebook was developed from the concept of MySpace. Everyone steals ideas from another, it's how the business world works and has always worked. As long as you use the product you think is most beneficial to YOU and don't buy into the whole one corporation against another the consumer will win in the long run. It's survival of the fittest, it always has been. If something new comes along that is better than everything else, even if the idea was copied, the old guys have to adapt or die :)

Re:No Direction (1)

AngryDeuce (2205124) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723972)

Look at Google+ and their attempt to push Facebook and others out of business because they have "the name". Thankfully, it doesn't seem like it's working

What "others"? For Social Media, what are the real competitors in the market right now? Facebook, Google+, and...uh....Twitter? Is Twitter considered a real Facebook competitor? Is Myspace still considered a competitor, or just a joke? Personally, I know a lot of hardcore Facebook users that are glad that G+ came around, if only to force Facebook to make some concessions in security. You think Zuck & Co. would have made these changes independently on their own? Even with strong consumer demand they still pretty much told people to take it or leave it...until G+, and they've only got what, 40 million users now? A lot of influence for such a tiny marketshare.

I'm all for Google getting into the music business. The more online services there are, the more they will compete for our business. I can only hope that Google's arrival to the market will have the same effect on iTunes as G+ did for FB. It may not be as good for Apple, but it will be good for consumers, and as I don't have a vested interest in any of these companies, that is my number one concern.

I've been using Google Music for about a month and a half now, and I've been quite happy with it (although uploading all of my 18,000 tracks took weeks). It's still got it's bugs, but all in all I've had good experiences. If Google can place a market on top of that without shoving it down our throats with a billion pop-ups and click-throughs, or annoyware, than I think they can take their place alongside Amazon and iTunes, and that will be better for us music consumers.

Honestly, how many people would be using iTunes if the iDevices didn't require it? Would their market share be anywhere near what it is today? I doubt it. Bring on the competition.

Re:No Direction (1)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 2 years ago | (#37724114)

Google is scrambling for something good and all they can think of doing is what everyone else is doing, with a slight twist.

So, what is wrong with competition? Do you really think there should be One True Provider of every product and that's it? If Google thinks they can do better, then so be it. Let them try.

is it me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37723646)

or did google used to innovate? now their just making incremental improvements on what everyone else already does & pretends it's going to be new & fresh & cool because they did it. is this going to be called gTunes+

gOoGIe- (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37723702)

Its seems they are always following in the wake of others' ingenuity being all proud and boisterous of their accomplishments, pushing their way into your living rooms and offices aNd bedrooMs, but then they were the first of the great search engines, right? They, by their own lack of privacy concerns give most people the shudders and reason to hate them.

Will Apps users be able to use it? (1)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723760)

HA! Just kidding. We all know the answer to that one.

PSA: Avoid Google Apps at all costs.

How soon will it be shut down? (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723826)

Seriously unless the music is DRM free and just plain old quality MP3s then forget it. I'd be too concerned they'll shut it down in a year or two.

Google seems to struggle in this area (1)

bhunachchicken (834243) | more than 2 years ago | (#37723886)

A small trend I've noticed is that Google seems to struggle in the areas of music and TV a lot more than say... Apple. Why is that? Is it because they attempt to approach the licensing and royalties in a completely different way? Or is it that Apple, keen to sell hardware, are willing to take such a small slice of money per song / movie / TV show that the studios and labels are taking near 100% of the receipts?

Google TV seems to have gone nowhere. I can't see why, since it works very nicely on paper. Apple on the other hand seem to have zero problems in getting all the latest TV shows onto iTunes.

Have I missed something really obvious? Or are Google too inexperienced in this area to build a good case for using their services?

Re:Google seems to struggle in this area (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37724072)

Google employees follow a "we hate DRM" approach. Apple does not.
Guess which one the content owners would like to work with?

Re:Google seems to struggle in this area (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37724674)

Except Google Music in it's current form is "semi-DRM'd" -- that is, it strips the MP3s of meta info, stores it in a inaccessible database, and hides the files and playlists from the user. If you use Google Music, everything works fine, but it removes fundamental access to one's own collection if you want to use any third party app like PowerAmp. It's the antithesis of their own "Data Liberation" policy.

Re:Google seems to struggle in this area (1)

iamhassi (659463) | more than 2 years ago | (#37725554)

A small trend I've noticed is that Google seems to struggle in the areas of music and TV a lot more than say... Apple. Why is that?

Because Apple has a successful 10 year history in music starting with the iPod and iTunes in 2001. [wikipedia.org] The iPod sold well, and two years later in 2003 the iTunes Store was born. [wikipedia.org] The music industry had watched mp3 players grow in popularity since the Rio 300 in 1998 [wikipedia.org] and were eager to find any way to finally make some money from digital music rather than watch it be stolen and shared with software like Napster [wikipedia.org] so they were more than happy to put their content on iTunes. Recording industry really didn't have a choice, the iPod was what people were using to "steal" their music, so when the manufacture of the iPod came to them and said "would you like people to buy the music instead of steal it?" of course they said "YES!!"

Apple has become more powerful since then because people actually buy music through them, iTunes accounts for 26% of all US Music sales in 2010, more than Walmart and Best Buy combine. [gizmodo.com]

So even though google is Google, when someone with no mp3 player and no history comes along and says "we'd like to sell your music and videos" the music and movie industry isn't really all that interested.

Re:Google seems to struggle in this area (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37728808)

The music industry had watched mp3 players grow in popularity since the Rio 300 in 1998 and were eager to find any way to finally make some money from digital music rather than watch it be stolen and shared with software like Napster so they were more than happy to put their content on iTunes.

Actually, the music industry was very worried about Apple moreso than music. Steve Jobs had to actually play the "limited Mac marketshare" card to reassure the music execs. Of course, Jobs then opened it up to Windows later...

Stop trying to do everything, google. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37723998)

Stop trying to do everything, google. It will be your downfall.

Support open standards (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37724036)

I wish they'd support open standards like Ogg Vorbis and FLAC in stead of (or, more realistically, in addition to) legacy formats like mp3.

Re:Support open standards (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37725900)

I'd just like to see them support open access at the very least. Cut and paste from my other post:

Google Music in it's current form is "semi-DRM'd" -- that is, it strips the MP3s of meta info, stores it in a inaccessible database, and hides the files and playlists from the user. If you use Google Music, everything works fine, but it removes fundamental access to one's own collection if you want to use any third party app like PowerAmp. It's the antithesis of their own "Data Liberation" policy.

Give us acccess to fresh music (1)

future assassin (639396) | more than 2 years ago | (#37724120)

Seriously give those that are in their mid 30's or older and who don't have time to explore 100's of sites to find new and fresh music and nice easy way of previewing and buying music.

Not interested unless they offer Lossless (1)

Sirusjr (1006183) | more than 2 years ago | (#37724266)

We don't need another MP3 store, what we need is a mainstream site that offers lossless downloads of new music. In this internet age I shouldn't have to order the CD in order to get lossless audio, I should be able to download FLAC files of a new release direct from a legal content provider.

Re:Not interested unless they offer Lossless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37725088)

We don't need another MP3 store, what we need is a mainstream site that offers lossless downloads of new music. In this internet age I shouldn't have to order the CD in order to get lossless audio, I should be able to download FLAC files of a new release direct from a legal content provider.

try bandcamp.com. everything they sell is available in several formats including FLAC.

hear hear (1)

KingAlanI (1270538) | more than 2 years ago | (#37728490)

I agree with the sibling AC's suggestion of bandcamp, many of my favorite modern indie acts put their stuff on bandcamp and make FLAC downloads available.

I haven't used https://www.hdtracks.com/ [hdtracks.com] ; they seem to focus on classic reissues and jazz/classical/opera/etc. (They also have a lot of above-CD-quality FLACs)

Nevertheless, more FLAC availability would be good.

Probably US-only (2)

JohnnyBGod (1088549) | more than 2 years ago | (#37724424)

It's probably US-only, so I'm unable to care.

and another fail? (1)

M0j0_j0j0 (1250800) | more than 2 years ago | (#37724668)

Google typical user is not used to pay for any services or software, this will follow last google products trend, an epic fail.

Re:and another fail? (1)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 2 years ago | (#37725356)

Considering Google has something like 90 percent market share in most countries, are saying 90 percent of people dont pay for things? I'd say your post is an epoc fail.

Re:and another fail? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37726808)

Clearly he's referring to the uber-google user (like apparently yourself by your reaction) who use Goog's paid software free alternatives. Dick knocker.

Frist pSot (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37724806)

I think Google's freshness has faded... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37725454)

Most people seem to think they are as cool as Microsoft at this stage as their fun products never really go anywhere.

How many music services do we need? (3, Insightful)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#37728408)

All these different music services, competing for the same catalogues of music, trying to get exclusives whenever they can.

At what point is the market deemed "saturated"?

And what good are all these services when they're only available in certain regions of the world (primarily US and UK.)? What about everyone else? Is Apple the only one who can negotiate international sales and streaming rights?

iTunes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37731304)

Two things, IMHO:
1. You're not competing with iTunes if you sell music in the old MP3 format.
2. You're not competing with iTunes if you're limiting your market to the USA.

I have a great Online Music Store. (1)

Nyder (754090) | more than 2 years ago | (#37732376)

It's called The Pirate Bay.

And it carries movies, books, games, pretty much anything that can be digitized.

Oh ya, I can't beat the price.

The more money people spend keeping the music & movie industry going, the more crappy laws and stupid ass DRM shit we are going to get.

Bankrupt them, and we won't have to listen to them anymore.

You forgot one. (1)

Beacon11 (1499015) | more than 2 years ago | (#37739796)

"afabbro writes with news that Google is working to follow up its cloud music service with an MP3 store capable of competing with Amazon and Apple and Ubuntu One."

FTFY. I use Ubuntu One more than I use the other two.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>