Battle of the Bands
Jan. 19th, 2006 11:13 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jackofallgeeksSo, I've been playing around with this Napster thing, and I think I really like it. Which, at $0.99 a song, could become hazardous to my back account! -laughs- I was talking to my friend Laurel, though, who asked why I didn't get iTunes. And I really didn't have much of an answer for here -- iTunes has always made me feel uncomfortable, for no good reason, and Napster just feels like 'home'; they are, after all, how I started this whole thing, anyways.
So I'm curious if any of you out there can give me feedback on iTunes vs. Napster. A few points on Napster that I find pertinent for those who have iTunes but not this:
-Huge, searchable databases of songs, artists, and albums they've liscences to; very user-friendly in my estimation, including 'Artist Pages' that show pictures, discographies, and 'hot downloads' for almost every band.
-They let you preview any song; most of them in full, which you can often download to your machine free of charge (no burning rights), though some are buy-only and just have 30-second snips. This preview feature is key for me, 'cause the whole *point* is to know what I'm buying. Laurel said iTunes has a similar feature, but I wasn't aware of this.
-Songs download as .WMAs. This is a negative for me, as .WMA is Microsoft's filetype, and I just don't like Microsoft. I'm *much* more comfortable with mp3s, but those seem to have a stigma to them. (Avast, ye.)
-Built-in 'radio' feature, which selects a limited-random selection (based on the 'station' you pick) of songs in Napster's system to play there on your machine. In particular, I spent an hour or more listening to "Undercover" last night, a 'station' full of songs covered by different bands.
-The subscription fee for all of this is $9.95 a month; without the subscription, you can still buy tracks for $0.95 and albums for $9.95, but you can't download, and may not be able to preview. The subscription also gives a discount to buying albums, only $6.95
So I'm curious if any of you out there can give me feedback on iTunes vs. Napster. A few points on Napster that I find pertinent for those who have iTunes but not this:
-Huge, searchable databases of songs, artists, and albums they've liscences to; very user-friendly in my estimation, including 'Artist Pages' that show pictures, discographies, and 'hot downloads' for almost every band.
-They let you preview any song; most of them in full, which you can often download to your machine free of charge (no burning rights), though some are buy-only and just have 30-second snips. This preview feature is key for me, 'cause the whole *point* is to know what I'm buying. Laurel said iTunes has a similar feature, but I wasn't aware of this.
-Songs download as .WMAs. This is a negative for me, as .WMA is Microsoft's filetype, and I just don't like Microsoft. I'm *much* more comfortable with mp3s, but those seem to have a stigma to them. (Avast, ye.)
-Built-in 'radio' feature, which selects a limited-random selection (based on the 'station' you pick) of songs in Napster's system to play there on your machine. In particular, I spent an hour or more listening to "Undercover" last night, a 'station' full of songs covered by different bands.
-The subscription fee for all of this is $9.95 a month; without the subscription, you can still buy tracks for $0.95 and albums for $9.95, but you can't download, and may not be able to preview. The subscription also gives a discount to buying albums, only $6.95
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-01-20 08:44 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-01-20 11:54 am (UTC)- You can also preview songs, but only in clips (I think 30 seconds or so). All songs on iTunes are 'buy only.'
- iTunes download in Apple's own proprietary format. This is where things get tricky, at least for me. I don't have an iPod, I've got a Creative Labs mp3 player, and it won't play iTunes files. RealPlayer built an mp3 player that would, and now Apple is suing them for using "hacker-like tactics." Legally speaking, the status of the iTunes EUL, which doesn't allow you to change the format of the file is up in the air at the moment. Morally speaking, I'm of the opinion that it's perfectly acceptable for me to convert any iTunes tracks I buy into a format I can use on any system for my own personal use. Technically speaking, there's apparently software out there that will convert the iTunes format, though I've not used it. I use the lower-tech tactic of burning my iTunes purchases to CD and then ripping them back as mp3s.
- I think iTunes has a feature for playing songs you've bought, but I've not really used it.
- There's no user fee for iTunes, you just pay for what you buy. So, part of the bottom line is that you can just go download the software and check out the interface for yourself.