×

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!

Real Launches Music Download Service

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the music-wants-to-be-expensive dept.

Music 497

fupeg writes "Spurred on by Apple's success, as well as their own purchase of listen.com, Real Networks announced their own online music service, dubbed RealOne Rhapsody. Here is the press release. They're offering songs at $0.79 per song, but with a $9.99/month subscription. The first two months are free. The press release says that 2/3 of their 300,000 song catalog is available for CD burning, while everything is available for 'on-demand' listening."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

497 comments

The Real link....get it? (5, Informative)

mao che minh (611166) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059726)

Here is the link to the actual Rhapsody site [real.com] itself.

And yes, it requires a Windows PC and is only available in the United States. It looks they are having a 14 day trial, with the first three months at $4.98, months 4++ being $9.95 each. The free trial covers unlimited "on demand" music and Internet radio. CD burning costs are not covered by the free trial ($0.79 per song on each CD). It also sports a horrid image containing both Avril Lavigne and Fiddy Cent in close proximity to that David Bowie guy, who plain refuses to die and go away.

PS: fist post fools

Re:The Real link....get it? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059841)

Yet when you go to ask it more about the service it says you can access from ANY PC on one of the tabs, but then in the actual text it says any WINDOWS pc. Sort of irritates a user who only has linux, absolutely no windows machines...

Re:The Real link....get it? (-1, Flamebait)

conner_bw (120497) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059871)

Deja vu? The holy grail of sales, copmanies like Liquid Audio back in the dot com days getting all the hype with one slight problem. *clears throat*

NO ONE PAYS FOR RESTRICTIVE DRM GARBAGE THAT SUCKS.

Apple got it right because their hardware makes it easy and their idea of fair usage is actually fair.

Windows PC users are cheap will not pay for anything. If they did, they would have already paid for an Apple.

Re:The Real link....get it? (4, Funny)

Verteiron (224042) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059952)

That aside, Real's player software is so nasty it can physically drive the air from your body. If I wanted to undergo "the RealOne Player Experience", I'd just hit myself in the head with a wifflebat repeatedly and save myself the download time...

Re:The Real link....get it? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059904)

"that David Bowie guy"

are we a linkin park fan?

Re:The Real link....get it? (1)

bitrott (232312) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059924)

"that David Bowie guy, who plain refuses to die and go away."... thank you for the pertinent information, but if you don't stop talking your bad taste will make you sound like an idiot.

.79 per song per CD? (2, Interesting)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059948)

I took a look at the site from your link and it was a little unclear if that was exactly what they ment. The wording sure makes it look like it's really .79 every time yoou want to burn a song, but it seems really odd they would charge per burn... if that's true then the service does not seem cheap at all, if you want to make a bunch of different kind of mix CD's.

One CD I'm working on now thanks to the Apple store is a mix CD of Wierd Al songs next to the original counterparts - so I have Eminem's "Loose Yourself" right before you get to hear "Couch Potato" (although currently the Apple store itself does not carry Weird Al stuff so I have to burn from CD). I probably wouldn't be making such a CD though if I knew I was going to pay .79 for each song on the mix and have to pay again to use it on some other CD!

Woo Hoo! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059981)

I happily own both a Mac and PC....so this is double the fun. GOD I love competition...

>PS: fist post fools

I'm sorry....what is that about fisting? ;-)

your .sig (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6060001)

I pulled a jack move to cop this sig

You sure that wasn't supposed to read:

I jacked a cop to pull this sig move? Just asking.

The Real Impeachment: +1, Patriotic (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6060010)



bin Laden discovered as chef in Pentagon 2-1

President Cheney resigns by November 2004 6-1

Bush marries Tony Blair 2-5

Saddam Hussein discovered in President Cheney's bunker 1-2

G. W. Bush impeached by Sept. 2004 3-1

Cheers,
W00t

Get Your War On [mnftiu.cc]

Re:The Real link....get it? (bitrate) (1)

reactivo (189273) | more than 10 years ago | (#6060019)

Someone knows at which bitrate will one be able to play/burn the songs?

posting ac, article text: (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059750)

REALNETWORKS LAUNCHES REALONE RHAPSODY MUSIC SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE

RealOne RHAPSODY Offers 79 Transfer to CD and Access to the World's Largest Online Library of Major and Independent Label Music

CARLSBAD, CA, D: All Things Digital Conference - May 28, 2003 RealNetworks, Inc. (Nasdaq: RNWK) today announced a new music service, RealOne RHAPSODY, a co-branded version of the popular RHAPSODY digital music subscription service. RealOne RHAPSODY offers consumers unlimited, 'all you can eat' access to the broadest library of major and independent label music with more than 330,000 tracks available for on-demand listening and more than 200,000 songs available for transferring to CD, aka 'burning.' At only 79 per track, RealOne RHAPSODY offers subscribers the lowest per-burn price available to U.S. consumers through any of the new generation of digital music services.

In addition, RealOne RHAPSODY subscribers can burn full albums or custom mix CDs, build their own custom Internet radio stations, listen to professionally-programmed stations, and browse extensive music information and editorial recommendations. Offered with a 14-day free trial, consumers can sign up for RealOne RHAPSODY for $9.95 a month. Subscribers to RealNetworks' other subscription services will be able to sign-up for RealOne RHAPSODY service with one click. Please visit www.real.com [real.com] for details on how to sign up for RealOne RHAPSODY.

"We are thrilled to introduce RealOne RHAPSODY which offers consumers what they want - a deep library for on-demand listening, a customizable radio service and extremely affordable burns for those songs they just can't live without," said Merrill Brown, senior vice president, RealOne Services, RealNetworks. "We are especially excited about the availability of burns to CD for a mere 79 - we believe this is a great offer to consumers who are now realizing the power of online music services."

"We are extremely pleased to join RealNetworks in introducing the newest RealOne service, RealOne RHAPSODY," said Sean Ryan, CEO, Listen.com. "RHAPSODY's unlimited listening model is already a hit with subscribers, who listen to more than 250 unique songs a month on average. Adding 79-cent CD burning will enable subscribers to easily buy and own copies of songs they like the most at the lowest price anywhere."

Last month, RealNetworks announced that it had entered into a definitive agreement to acquire Listen.com. Listen.com introduced the RHAPSODY music service in 2001. The parties expect the acquisition to be final in the 2nd or 3rd quarter. With this acquisition, RealNetworks will own two of the Internet's best subscription content services, the critically-acclaimed and market-leading RealOne SuperPass, which offers leading news, sports and entertainment programming, and the award-winning RHAPSODY music service. There are more than one million subscribers to RealNetworks' subscription services.

For More Information:
Erika Shaffer, RealNetworks, 206-892-6191, eshaffer@real.com [mailto]
Matt Graves, Listen.com, 415-934-2159, mgraves@listen.com [mailto]

About RealNetworks
RealNetworks, Inc. is the leading global provider of network-delivered digital audio and video services and the creator of the technology that enables digital media creation, distribution and consumption and to feed cmdrtaco's enema fetish. Consumers use RealNetworks' RealOne Player and our content subscription services to create and play free and premium digital content. Broadcasters, network operators, media companies and enterprises use RealNetworks' products and services to deliver digital media to PCs, mobile phones and consumer electronics devices. Consumers can access and experience audio/video programming and download RealNetworks' consumer software at http://www.real.com [real.com]. RealNetworks' systems and corporate information is located at http://www.realnetworks.com [realnetworks.com].

MOD PARENT DOWN (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059775)

I'm sick and tired of this Anonymous Coward racking up the karma by cutting-and-pasting the text of the article. Furthermore, I hope Taco would do the sensible thing and simply remove AC postings altogether. They're a blight upon Slashdot.

MOD CHILD UP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059877)

If you want your posting to be mod'ed high, reply to this.

ok, here's the valuable info you wanted. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059942)

insert goatse link here.

Question (1)

Iscariot_ (166362) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059753)

So, correct me if I'm wrong but... The "on-demand" tunes are free, and you just pay for burning right?

Re:Question (5, Informative)

djcatnip (551428) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059928)

Nope, 10 bucks a month for access to the library, then 79 cents per song per cd you burn. 10 bucks to find an album, then full album price to brun it to a cd... *a* cd, not *as many cds as you want*.

Re:Question (1)

bathmatt (638217) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059930)

The "on-demand" tunes are free, and you just pay for burning right?

That is the way that I read it. It sounds like a good idea sans the windows only "feature" I would like access to a large audio library and then burn the tracks I like on a CD for a price. Subscribe for a while and (assuming you don't need a subscrition) cancel with your CD's in tact.

Now, if they tie the burned data to a maintance fee, well, that is just plain silly...

Real Player! (0, Redundant)

youngerpants (255314) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059762)

but I HATE real player... will they all be in RM format

nasty horrible software

Re:Real Player! (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059791)

I have to agree completely w/ this ... Real's player is one of the most vicious software apps out there, rivaled only by AOL for its tenacity in taking over every aspect of your PC's identity in an attempt to push its software down your throat. Neither Real nor AOL are ever welcome on my PC.

Re:Real Player! (5, Informative)

Methlin (604355) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059949)

1) Install Real's free player.
2) Set it up to not launch it's systray app.
3) Get Media Player Classic from www.doom9.org [doom9.org]
4) Listen to/View Real content without using Real's crappy player.
5) ???
6) Profit!

If you're using Linux on x86 just go get mplayer and quityerbitchin.

It's worse than that (2, Insightful)

Arker (91948) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059974)

At least if it was in RA it would be cross platform. Apparently they are using some form of WMA? Idiotic.

Awesome. (4, Insightful)

sabNetwork (416076) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059774)

I'd like to remind everyone, before making flash judgements:

This is a good thing. Whether or not RealNetworks can pull it off (and they might, being the first comparable option in the Windows market), competition will help. Perhaps this will lower Apple's per-song fee.

Bravo for taking a risk.

Not so awesome. (4, Informative)

Theaetetus (590071) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059866)

This is a good thing. Whether or not RealNetworks can pull it off (and they might, being the first comparable option in the Windows market), competition will help. Perhaps this will lower Apple's per-song fee.

Really? Let's say you're an average, music-loving consumer... You might download say, 20 songs a month, right?

Apple cost: 20*$.99 = $20 (I'm rounding the penny)
Real cost: 20*$.79 = $16 (rounding the penny) plus $10 for monthly fee = $36 dollars.

So, why should Apple lower their fee? It's already cheaper. The only way the Real model gets cheaper is if you download more than 50 songs a month, every month you're subscribed.

-T

Re:Not so awesome. (1)

redvision4 (105878) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059922)

Real cost: 20*$.79 = $16 (rounding the penny) plus $10 for monthly fee = $36 dollars.
I know you meant $26.00, so yeah you are right. I don't think there are 50 songs/mo coming out of the RIAA that are worth dowloading.

Re:Not so awesome. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059993)

Um, Justin Timberlake?

Re:Not so awesome. (1)

Alan (347) | more than 10 years ago | (#6060014)

Regardless, only one player in the market leads to monopoly type situations, whereas > 1 leads to competition (even if it is sucky competition) which is good.

Re:Awesome. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6060005)

I agree, this is a good thing -- I have actually been using Listen Rhapsody for about 6 months now and really enjoy the service. I am a little worried about what Real will do to the service, but I suppose it's a "wait and see" sort of situation. This service has been available for quite a while, just a question of marketing really. With this much press and the name "Real" stuck to it, I am sure that people will both check it out and run like hell ;)

Cost breakdown (4, Insightful)

Theaetetus (590071) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059776)

$9.95/month plus $.79/song... and this is supposed to be cheap?

Sure, it's .20 cheaper than the Apple Music Store per song... However, due to that monthly fee, the only way it actually balances out is if you download more than 50 songs a month ($10/50=$.20 - download less than that and each song is correspondingly more expensive than the $.99 charge).

Plus, this doesn't include the Apple $9.95 for a full album pricing option.

-T

Re:Cost breakdown (5, Informative)

Wawbo (197215) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059830)

But you have full access to the catalog for on-demand listening, plus all the niceties that comes with the service. I have been using Rhapsody for a while now and its just amazing by itself, with or without the ability to burn.
Looking at it in another way, you can sample the full song before commiting to buying it, not just short 30sec clips.

Re:Cost breakdown (1)

Theaetetus (590071) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059987)

But you have full access to the catalog for on-demand listening, plus all the niceties that comes with the service. I have been using Rhapsody for a while now and its just amazing by itself, with or without the ability to burn. Looking at it in another way, you can sample the full song before commiting to buying it, not just short 30sec clips.

... which I do for free on the radio now. I will readily admit that this doesn't let me listen to all of the indie stuff out there (except that I'm in Boston, with more college stations than anywhere else in the country) - but it's not worth $10 a month to me to just sample the indie stuff. I'd rather hear something I like on the radio or with a friend, and then go buy it - maybe check a 30 second clip to be sure I've got the right song.

-T

Re:Cost breakdown (1)

RealBeanDip (26604) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059861)

Yeah, but you don't have to pay the "Apple Tax" to use it, so it's going to be cheaper.

Apple Tax? iTMS for Windows! (1)

Llywelyn (531070) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059950)

Neither do you--iTunes is comming to Windows later this year.

Re:Apple Tax? iTMS for Windows! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059996)

And will it work with that shitty free player, or do you have to pay the apple tax for the QT player that works?

FACE IT

FACT:

Apple is teh suck

Re:Cost breakdown (1)

Theaetetus (590071) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059964)

... or wait 6 months and use iTunes4 for Windows when that comes out.

Remember, Mac users are the beta-testers for this service.

-T

Re:Cost breakdown (1)

haa...jesus christ (576980) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059879)

i was thinking the same thing, but i suppose that some users will see value in the unlimited listening (if i'm in fact reading this right and 10 bucks buys you 'listen-only' access to 300k tracks)

Re:Cost breakdown (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059889)

99 cents/song

16 songs

$15.99/CD...

I don't see any improvement due to technology.

Now these guys charge 79 cents.

The next guys charge 59 cents.

And so on.

Eventually, they're giving the music away free to get you to look at the banner ads.

Napster's only mistake was not getting permission.

My number one question (-1, Troll)

T_moz (648207) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059778)

Will it support Linux?

Will It Support? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059921)



Will your butthole support my throbbing squirt master?

Yeah right.. (4, Interesting)

conner_bw (120497) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059785)

I trust Real like i trust a child molester. Can i have more intrusion please?

Apple has the market cornered thanks to their hardware locking in their customers.

They don't even have to compete with these goons since no one is going to use it on the mac platform, and the PC platform will soon have thousands of cruddy profitless evil DRM driven competitors with terrible business models competeing against each other, far far FAR away from the OSX platform.

Re:Yeah right.. (2, Interesting)

Funksaw (636954) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059920)

I don't know if I'd say that the above poster is a troll... I've had some pretty crummy experiences with Real. Each version has gotten more bloated, more intrusive... RealOne was when I finally gave up on the platform.

I'm not sure if this will take off. I'm betting on "no" because of two factors:

Subscription Fees are bad.

People like to own, not rent, music.

-- Funky

This ain't gonna fly (3, Insightful)

melted (227442) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059786)

"Real" guys can't have it both ways. Either do subscription thing (this is what Microsoft wants to do, and they're TOUGH competitors), OR do pay-per-song thing (this is what Apple already does, and they're tough competitors, too). Whoever has suggested this shit should be fired without any severance package.

Re:This ain't gonna fly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059917)

Actually, if they gave you so many burns a month for the subscription it wouldn't be that bad. Like, if they gave you 10 burns plus the unlimited streaming for that 9.95 then it would be worth it. The streaming is of course what that 9.95 is paying for. Whether or not it is worth it is for the consumer to decide.

Bandwidth Problem (1, Insightful)

superpulpsicle (533373) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059792)

IF this is a centralized place for downloading songs after songs.... how's this going to hold up better than P2P, where I just grab another song elsewhere when one link is discontinued?

on demand? (5, Insightful)

Musashi Miyamoto (662091) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059796)

I can't imagine most people paying for something that allows only on-demand listening. There are far too many limitations to on-demand listening:

Must be on a Windows PC attached to a high-speed internet line in the United States. So that cuts out listening to your music on any sort of musical "appliance" like a radio or cd player... You can't listen in your car, or anywhere else.

Its much like watching re-runs of Friends on pay-per-view. Who would want that?

Did they already try this and fail miserably? (3, Interesting)

ih8apple (607271) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059800)

Did they already try this and fail miserably?

It was called MusicNet. [siliconvalley.com]

From the link: "The original MusicNet that launched in December 2001 was a dismal failure...The subscriber numbers were so low that MusicNet has never been willing to state them in public."

In the right direction (2, Insightful)

bobtheheadless (467304) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059801)

I wouldn't buy that service myself, but I think at the very least its a good sign that the industry is realizing that maybe (just maybe) distributing music on the internet isn't as gastly as first thought.

Wow, that's (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059802)

unReal.

Pay money for music? (3, Funny)

Monkeyman334 (205694) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059809)

I'm suprised Real Networks is selling music, you can get it for free, from Real.com [real.com]. Just look very hard for the link, it's right next to the free real player download link... really...

PS, Real Networks can burn in hell.

Format please? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059811)

Please tell me these aren't all in "RA" format? I know we are going to have to deal with some stupid rights management format but at least give us something decent?

why do they keep trying subscription services (2, Informative)

mjdth (670822) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059813)

when they have been proven to not work. the only way they would beat the apple store is by using the same model but undercutting their prices and getting it out to windows users before iTunes for windows is released. The stat was that in the entire year before iTunes Music store was released, a total of 500,000 songs were actually sold from all of the subscription based services combined. Apple sold 1 million in the first 18 hours if i recall correctly.

if anything, just copy apple and try to market it better... you could even call yourself microsoft then! ;)

Real? Ech! (1)

payndz (589033) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059820)

If the playback quality's as shitty as everything else I've seen from Real, it makes me doubly glad that I live outside the US *and* don't run Windows, so can't get the service!

And will it use mp3?? (1, Insightful)

DrXym (126579) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059824)

Of course it bloody won't! Thus rendering it completely and utterly useless to the vast majority of people who might otherwise sign up for it.


It is a wonder that Apple et al do not support mp3. If their proprietary or licenced technology is so wonderful and superior, where is the harm of offering mp3 as well for backwards compatibility since it doesn't compete? If mp3 is perceived as not having DRM, why not watermark the songs as they fly off the server so they can be tracked?


Both are quite feasible and one wonders why these services hobble themselves like this. The net result is users will stick to free p2p services, grabbing their songs from Kazaa and the record companies will get NOTHING and the services will have a fraction of the customers. It doesn't make any business sense.

Re:And will it use mp3?? (1)

47Ronin (39566) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059986)

Buy the song download, then convert into an MP3. ITunes plays a dozen of formats, and QuickTime plays even more. It's pretty simple, if you've ever used the dang thing.

Re:And will it use mp3?? (1)

Funksaw (636954) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059994)

I'm almost tempted to ask "mod parent down" but it's not really worth it.

AACs can be burnt to CD, instead of MP3. If you NEED MP3, you can always reimport from that CD you just burned.

DRM's part of the reason why it's not MP3, sure.

Another BIG part of it is that AAC take up less bandwidth than similar quality MP3 files.

Offering the same music *twice* would be stupid when you're talking about a situation when you've got a bunch of bandwidth costs to consider.

Marketing drivel (4, Funny)

pixelpusher220 (529617) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059831)

from the article:

"we believe this is a great offer to consumers who are now realizing the power of online music services"

That's it, the consumer is just now realizing the power of online music. Sheesh.

Back-end economics? (2, Interesting)

David Price (1200) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059844)

Apple's service enables CD burning. Real's, presumably, doesn't for recent hits - tracks that the record industry is particularly interested in keeping off the p2p services. I don't know what the actual factors are that influence Real's classification of a track as burnable or not are, but I think this makes for a viable theory.

Real has slightly crippled their service relative to Apple's, but they are, in return, able to offer a discount to those users who download 50 songs or more per month.

Of course, we have to ask - who is doing the returning here? I'd be interested in learning what sorts of costs are being placed on the supply-side upon these services. Is the record industry giving discounts to services depending on the level of crippledness they impose upon consumers? I'd be very curious to know what the terms of the contracts are that Apple and Real signed with the recording industry companies.

Did I miss something? (2, Interesting)

cbovasso (608431) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059853)

I dont get why so many people pay per song when they can get them for free on Kazaa. Is this the moral line we are going to draw in the sand? I never understood the reasoning behind the idea of mp3's and p2p being illegal. Before the internet I used to tape songs off the radio and make mix tapes and trade them with friends. If thats not illegal how is this illegal? Because of quality? How can the output and not the act be the sole difference between something being illegal and something not. I don't get it. Am I being glib here?

Re:Did I miss something? (1)

rolocroz (625853) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059888)

Before the internet I used to tape songs off the radio and make mix tapes and trade them with friends. If thats not illegal how is this illegal?

I was under the impression that that was illegal.

Re:Did I miss something? (5, Insightful)

HBI (604924) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059997)

This is the same industry that pushed through mandated SCMS (serial copy management) for all DAT music players. The result was that the consumer format failed even though it would have been an adequate replacement for cassette tape and avoided a lot of the trauma associated with burnable CD-Rs. They tried hard to kill that technology but failed as well. Minidiscs were a similar situation though Sony managed to kill that all by itself.

The recording industry's business plan has been floundering for years - expecting logic from them, beyond the logic that they need to make money, is silly.

Incidentally, those mix tapes were illegal, unfortunately, once they left your hands and entered someone else's. The difference was no one cared back then.

IT's Real!!! (4, Interesting)

TedTschopp (244839) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059860)

How many of you trust or want Real to be selling you music.

This is from the company hides their free player, tricks you into purchasing an upgrade, and has an install process which hijacks everything on your browser.

Even if this was a good bargin I would reject if becuase it is from Real.

Ted Tschopp

Re:IT's Real!!! (1)

clarencek (146670) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059900)

Also, check the encoding quality. 128kbps MP3? Is that CD quality???

128kbps to me is radio quality which is far from CD quality. Apple's 128kbps AAC is much better.

possible competition? (3, Funny)

killermal (545771) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059864)

Kazza is offering songs at $0.00 per song, with a $0.00/month subscription.

Re:possible competition? (3, Insightful)

Steve B (42864) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059902)

Kazza is offering songs at $0.00 per song, with a $0.00/month subscription.

Plus all the viruses, mislabeled files, and just plain crappy rips you can download, all for the same low low price!

Yes, Virginia, you can compete with "free" if what you're offering is actually worth money.

Re:possible competition? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059913)

Yeah, but at least I know how to pronounce "Real".


Is it ka-ZAH or KAH-za? and what the hell does it mean? Get Real!

It's scary... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059868)

...when you think about it, how big Real Networks is trying to become when really their only product is a crappy little media player that acts more like virus/spyware in my opinion.

It even got the former CEO elected to congress...Not to say she is bad though, I honestly know little about her but Real Networks track record leaves A LOT to be desired.

I don't think there is a chance in hell I will bring them any of my business.

I RTFPR, but... (1)

switcha (551514) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059872)

is there any good explanation anywhere about what on demand means? Is that latin for "You are totally f'ed when you pay for a song, then want to listen on-demand at home on your dial-up"?

But, uh.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6059875)

the real.com people are complete criminals. The software is sophisticated malware from hell.

what labels? (2, Interesting)

schuster (39361) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059881)

all I want to know is, what labels have they signed up yet? I'm betting the big 5 aren't going to be as enthusiastic about working with real on this

emusic (2, Informative)

merz (550238) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059883)

is still the best deal in my opinion. $15 a month for unlimited access. Sweet.

Streaming with Realplayer, RIAA and Internet radio (3, Insightful)

Captain Beefheart (628365) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059890)

79 cents sounds fairly decent for burning tracks, but if "on demand," i.e. streaming, requires that horrid Real One player, you can count me out. That damn app is too intrusive, IMO. I just want something that can play a file, but they turn it into a braying "push content" mechanism that makes me want to punch a hole in the monitor. No thanks.

And I can listen to Internet radio on Shoutcast et al...No wonder the RIAA was so adamant about getting rid of free Internet radio. The puzzle pieces are coming together, aren't they?

What part of "bend over" don't you understand? (2, Insightful)

Mulletproof (513805) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059896)

"CD burning costs are not covered by the free trial ($0.79 per song on each CD)"

You're kidding. They want to charge me for the use of MY CD burner and MY blank media? Gee, this plan is destined for success...

Re:What part of "bend over" don't you understand? (2, Insightful)

nahdude812 (88157) | more than 10 years ago | (#6060006)

No, no, they're not charging you to use your burner, they're charging you to let you burn their content on your burner. You'd still be able to burn stuff on your own, you just wouldn't be able to download their songs and burn them for free. You pay a licencing fee which ultimately ends up in a few pennies making it back to the artist.

Your comment is like saying "$18 for the latest rap CD? You gotta be kidding me, they're charging $18 to let me use my own cd player!"

Marconi invents new music delivery system (4, Funny)

jason99si (131298) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059935)

Guglielmo Marconi has released a new system for music delivery, its called "Radio". Unfortunately, it doesn't provide the ability to select a particular song, but it does provide the ability to choose genre.

The reduced functionality vs. Real's new system comes at a reduced price, FREE. And all songs are available for downloading and burning, all within a user's fair use rights.

User adoption is still up in the air, and Nikola Telsa is challening the patent.

Subscriptions blow (4, Insightful)

wazzzup (172351) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059937)

I've been buying CD's now since 1987 or so. I still like some of the CD's I bought back then. I cannot fathom having paid $10/month since 1987 just so I could still have it in my collection.

I want to buy my music and call it mine to play whereever and whenever I darn well please thank you. Can you imagine forgetting a month and -poof- CD collection gone! I'm probably missing something here since I can't imagine this appeals to anybody.

This competition could be good... (1)

kevin_conaway (585204) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059946)

For users who are actually interested in this type of service, all the competition could be good. I think 4 different institutions are now starting something like this (Apple, Microsoft, Real and PSU [kind of]). Anyone think that with all these people competing against each other for the same thing that the prices of songs will drop and they might standardise the music format?
Probably not but it would be cool

kc

$.99 - $.79 - do I hear $.49??? (1)

Dugsmyname (451987) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059956)

The only other major player that is left to offer content at a lower price would be Microsoft, or a major music company.... I can see the price dropping even further as these services ramp up. I also think that the monthly fees will go away with future reincarnations of this business model. Maybe these music companies are starting to get a clue that people want to download music, and not pay 16 bucks for a CD with 13 tracks that is only 38 minutes long...

10 bucks a month to be allowed to buy from them?? (1)

frovingslosh (582462) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059959)

$0.79 per song, but with a $9.99/month subscription.

So they expect people to pay $9.99 a month for the privledge of being allowed to pay them per song for lossy compressed songs? I guess there are some fools who will.

Diagram for insertion of the male organ (-1)

(TK2)Dessimat0r (669581) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059973)

___
.-'` `'-.
_,.'.888 888.'.,_
/ / .___. .___. \ \
/ / >( o ) ( O )< \ \
: /| o'~'___'~' |\ ;
l l`\_,.o'` `"-.,_/'l l
l l \ o / l l
l l \ / l l
l l \ __ / l l
l l \ (oo) / l l
l l \_____/ l l
l l \"""/ l l
l l """ l l
\_/ RAPE ME \_/

# Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic.
# Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads.
# Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been

said.
# Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about.
# Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read

everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)

# Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic.
# Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads.
# Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been

said.
# Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about.
# Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read

everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)

# Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic.
# Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads.
# Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been

said.
# Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about.
# Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read

everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)

Uh oh... (2, Insightful)

ryanr (30917) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059980)

I'm seeing a problem.

I just subscribed to a trial of Rhapsody from Best Buy. (Is this the same as Real Rhapsody? No name confusion there...) (another side note, it's scary how much info Best Bad had based on my phone number at the cash register, but that's a YRO topic...)

I've also been interested in iTunes, if they make a Windows version. This sounds interesting, too.

Problem is, the two Rhapsody's are subscription-based. Presumably, due to partnerships, etc... all these various services will have somewhat different catalogs. I can afford to buy as much as I can afford at $.99/pop or whatever the price is... but I can't afford $10/service/month to have access to all the different songs to buy them.

Hopefully they'll all figure out soon that the model should be $.xx/song with no membership fees. I think the only way this is going to work out is if consumers have unfettered access to buy all songs available regardless of who is offering them.

To be fair, the Rhapsody from Best Buy seems to let me just download as much as I can eat, and burn them to CD if I want. I haven't read through all the license stuff yet, but obviously practically speaking, I'm buying copies of the songs. At $10/mo, that's only 10 songs to break even (assuming $1/song is fair). That's attractive, if the song catalog is sufficient.

I will never subscribe for music (1)

SirAnodos (463311) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059985)

I will never pay a subscription for music. Let me buy it and burn it on a per track/per album basis. Let me own it, just like I own the CDs I buy at the store.
I hate subscriptions, and I think I speak for the great majority of the market. Subscription was the one thing that turned me away from all the other legal internet music offerings. Once Apple comes out with a Windows version, I'm on board. If someone else comes out with a service just like Apple's before Apple does, or cheaper than Apple, I'm on board.
Someone help me understand why these companies can't figure out something so obvious? It only takes me a split second to think like a consumer to realize this idea won't fly. How can people whose full time job it is to figure this out not figure it out?

Still not good enough. (1)

Ishin (671694) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059992)

The press release says that 2/3 of their 300,000 song catalog is available for CD burning

Am I the only one that cringes every time I hear about one of these new services? I feel that even so much as casting their inane 'you buy it, but don't own it' business model in a positive light is a disservice to anyone not affiliated with the RIAA.

As far as I'm concerned, music should be a black and white/all or nothing deal. Either the music is free of anything attempting to block it from WHATEVER use I choose to put it to, or I (along with everyone else) don't (shouldn't) buy it. I want the music company over a barrell begging me not to do what they don't want, not the other way around (the way it's supposed to be in a free market, the customer controls at least as much as the seller.)

Too complaicated priceing plan (4, Insightful)

AnamanFan (314677) | more than 10 years ago | (#6059999)

This is a way too complicated of a pricing plan for a basic home user.

There are simply way to many rules with this plan as stated. I pay a monthly fee, so I should be able to use any song right? No, I have to pay for each song [after the trial]. So why am I paying a monthly fee? Then I get the song, and realize I can use it but for my computer?

You try selling that to the guy on the street.

That's why the Apple plan works. $.99 a song. We'll give you a discount if you buy a full album (for most CDs). No monthly fee. Burn, iPod, play your songs you got. There are some restrictions, but transparent to the average user. That's easier to sell to the guy on the street.

Let's do the 5th grade math folks... (4, Insightful)

SuperMario666 (588666) | more than 10 years ago | (#6060018)

10 tracks @ RealR - $7.90 + $9.95 = $17.85
10 tracks @ Apple - $9.90 + $0.00 = $09.90

25 tracks @ RealR - $19.75 + $9.95 = $29.70
25 tracks @ Apple - $24.75 + $0.00 = $24.75

50 tracks @ RealR - $39.50 + $9.95 = $49.45
50 tracks @ Apple - $49.50 + $0.00 = $49.50

So I have to buy fifty tracks per month before Real Rhapsody is even remotely competive, not to mention the fact that something like one-third of the tracks aren't burnable at all.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...