<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:go='http://ns.gigaom.com/'
xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: New iTunes Pricing and DRM Removal Questions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:06:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: My first (and hopefully last) purchase on iTunes &#124; Steamroller Music</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338048</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[My first (and hopefully last) purchase on iTunes &#124; Steamroller Music]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 07:38:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338048</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] me access to a massive library of legal music that is now – at the very least – finally both DRM-free and of acceptable digital quality (256kbps).  What does this jargon mean?  Those who’ve been [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] me access to a massive library of legal music that is now – at the very least – finally both DRM-free and of acceptable digital quality (256kbps).  What does this jargon mean?  Those who’ve been [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338047</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 18:35:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338047</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What&#039;s actually kind of funny is that pirates haven&#039;t quite figured it out yet. Pirates often rip movies from DVDs by taking MPEG-2 / AC3 content and ripping it into the DivX clone of the non-standard, proprietary V3 video codec and then dumping it into the archaic AVI format.

&lt;i&gt;However&lt;/i&gt;, torrents would be a lot smaller, and &lt;i&gt;easier to share&lt;/i&gt;, if the pirates just ripped directly into multichannel AAC.

After all, you can now decode AC3 into multichannel AAC (via Handbrake). That’s all they&#039;d need to do! AAC provides much better compression so by using AAC, &lt;b&gt;torrents would be faster and easier to rip, upload, and download...&lt;i&gt;and&lt;/i&gt; it would be easier to store more of them on your computer because they take up less space!&lt;/b&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What&#8217;s actually kind of funny is that pirates haven&#8217;t quite figured it out yet. Pirates often rip movies from DVDs by taking MPEG-2 / AC3 content and ripping it into the DivX clone of the non-standard, proprietary V3 video codec and then dumping it into the archaic AVI format.</p>
<p><i>However</i>, torrents would be a lot smaller, and <i>easier to share</i>, if the pirates just ripped directly into multichannel AAC.</p>
<p>After all, you can now decode AC3 into multichannel AAC (via Handbrake). That’s all they&#8217;d need to do! AAC provides much better compression so by using AAC, <b>torrents would be faster and easier to rip, upload, and download&#8230;<i>and</i> it would be easier to store more of them on your computer because they take up less space!</b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338046</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 18:09:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338046</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[AAC was originally called MPEG-2 AAC, which is probably why it wasn&#039;t originally called MP4 from the get go.

For instance, here&#039;s what &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dolby.com/consumer/technology/aac.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Dolby.com has to say about AAC&lt;/a&gt;:

&lt;blockquote&gt;AAC (Advanced Audio Coding) is a perceptual coding method used to compress digital audio files for efficient storage and transmission. Upon playback, the expanded files can provide sound quality nearly indistinguishable from the original sources. In principle, AAC is similar to MP3, but offers a number of advantages designed to improve audio quality. These include higher-efficiency compression, more channels, and better handling of audio frequencies above 16 kHz. The improved efficiency of AAC files makes AAC a particularly good choice for streaming audio over the Internet.
AAC, developed in part by Dolby Laboratories, is one of several audio coding systems defined by ISO MPEG standards, where it was first specified as MPEG-2 AAC, and then enhanced and extended within MPEG-4. Apple’s popular iTunes® music service employs the AAC format.&lt;/blockquote&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AAC was originally called MPEG-2 AAC, which is probably why it wasn&#8217;t originally called MP4 from the get go.</p>
<p>For instance, here&#8217;s what <a href="http://www.dolby.com/consumer/technology/aac.html" rel="nofollow">Dolby.com has to say about AAC</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>AAC (Advanced Audio Coding) is a perceptual coding method used to compress digital audio files for efficient storage and transmission. Upon playback, the expanded files can provide sound quality nearly indistinguishable from the original sources. In principle, AAC is similar to MP3, but offers a number of advantages designed to improve audio quality. These include higher-efficiency compression, more channels, and better handling of audio frequencies above 16 kHz. The improved efficiency of AAC files makes AAC a particularly good choice for streaming audio over the Internet.<br />
AAC, developed in part by Dolby Laboratories, is one of several audio coding systems defined by ISO MPEG standards, where it was first specified as MPEG-2 AAC, and then enhanced and extended within MPEG-4. Apple’s popular iTunes® music service employs the AAC format.</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Lee</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338033</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dave Lee]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:18:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338033</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Also because the majority of the public see &#039;MP3 Player&#039; and think oh i MUST Need MP3, anyone with a bit of tech mind would know different.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also because the majority of the public see &#8216;MP3 Player&#8217; and think oh i MUST Need MP3, anyone with a bit of tech mind would know different.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Reestman</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338039</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Reestman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:54:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338039</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Quix,

&quot;Why wouldn’t Amazon/Walmart/etc. have standardized on AAC as well?&quot;

Because companies are too lazy to do something different, and would rather play on the ignorance of their customer base.

When Amazon announced their store I called them in this, for what it&#039;s worth:

http://thesmallwave.com/2007/05/21/amazon-to-sell-drm-free-music-online-in-the-wrong-format/]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Quix,</p>
<p>&#8220;Why wouldn’t Amazon/Walmart/etc. have standardized on AAC as well?&#8221;</p>
<p>Because companies are too lazy to do something different, and would rather play on the ignorance of their customer base.</p>
<p>When Amazon announced their store I called them in this, for what it&#8217;s worth:</p>
<p><a href="http://thesmallwave.com/2007/05/21/amazon-to-sell-drm-free-music-online-in-the-wrong-format/" rel="nofollow">http://thesmallwave.com/2007/05/21/amazon-to-sell-drm-free-music-online-in-the-wrong-format/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Quix</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338045</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Quix]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 14:35:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338045</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Feel free to rip the same song at 256K MP3 and 256K AAC and you’ll see different files sizes.&quot;

Indeed, you are correct.  I ripped &quot;Human&quot; from the Killers at 256 kbps CBR in both AAC and MP3.  The MP3 file is 7.5 MB.  The AAC file is 5.7 MB.  That&#039;s a very significant difference.

What&#039;s odd about AAC is that Apple are the only company to really jump on the format, despite its obvious advantages (and the length of time it&#039;s been on the market now).  Why wouldn&#039;t Amazon/Walmart/etc. have standardized on AAC as well?

It appears the naming choice (Advanced Audio Coding (AAC)) was a tremendous marketing blunder by the founders.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Feel free to rip the same song at 256K MP3 and 256K AAC and you’ll see different files sizes.&#8221;</p>
<p>Indeed, you are correct.  I ripped &#8220;Human&#8221; from the Killers at 256 kbps CBR in both AAC and MP3.  The MP3 file is 7.5 MB.  The AAC file is 5.7 MB.  That&#8217;s a very significant difference.</p>
<p>What&#8217;s odd about AAC is that Apple are the only company to really jump on the format, despite its obvious advantages (and the length of time it&#8217;s been on the market now).  Why wouldn&#8217;t Amazon/Walmart/etc. have standardized on AAC as well?</p>
<p>It appears the naming choice (Advanced Audio Coding (AAC)) was a tremendous marketing blunder by the founders.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338044</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 14:16:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338044</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[BTW...Gruber also points out in a &lt;a href=&quot;http://daringfireball.net/2007/04/wee_bit_more_on_aac&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;follow-up post&lt;/a&gt;...

&lt;blockquote&gt;&quot;...The confusion over whether AAC is an “Apple format” is in some measure a byproduct of the format’s acronym, and that many people assume that one of the A’s in “AAC” stands for “Apple”. (It stands for “Advanced Audio Coding”.) If it were called, say, “MP4” instead, it might be more clear that it’s the successor to MP3.&quot;&lt;/blockquote&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BTW&#8230;Gruber also points out in a <a href="http://daringfireball.net/2007/04/wee_bit_more_on_aac" rel="nofollow">follow-up post</a>&#8230;</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;&#8230;The confusion over whether AAC is an “Apple format” is in some measure a byproduct of the format’s acronym, and that many people assume that one of the A’s in “AAC” stands for “Apple”. (It stands for “Advanced Audio Coding”.) If it were called, say, “MP4” instead, it might be more clear that it’s the successor to MP3.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338043</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 14:10:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338043</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[John Gruber has an excellent piece on AAC for those who are misinformed.

Well worth the read.

http://daringfireball.net/2007/04/some_facts_about_aac]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John Gruber has an excellent piece on AAC for those who are misinformed.</p>
<p>Well worth the read.</p>
<p><a href="http://daringfireball.net/2007/04/some_facts_about_aac" rel="nofollow">http://daringfireball.net/2007/04/some_facts_about_aac</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Reestman</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338042</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Reestman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 08:55:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338042</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Quix,

&quot;isn’t the bitrate the literal amount of data contained in a file?&quot;

Not at all. Feel free to rip the same song at 256K MP3 and 256K AAC and you&#039;ll see different files sizes. AAC files are smaller at the same sample rate (and sound better).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Quix,</p>
<p>&#8220;isn’t the bitrate the literal amount of data contained in a file?&#8221;</p>
<p>Not at all. Feel free to rip the same song at 256K MP3 and 256K AAC and you&#8217;ll see different files sizes. AAC files are smaller at the same sample rate (and sound better).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Quix</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338038</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Quix]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 05:43:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338038</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Oh, and I don&#039;t believe AAC has &quot;smaller file sizes&quot; - isn&#039;t the bitrate the literal amount of data contained in a file?  So the same 5 minute song in 256 MP3 and 256 AAC should be the same file size, no?

I think the argument should be that AAC sounds as good as MP3 at a *lower bitrate*, making for a smaller file size.  But since we&#039;re assumedly comparing iTunes Plus (256 kbps) AAC to  Amazon MP3 (256 kbps), the file sizes should be similar if not identical.  But the iTunes Plus song should sound *better*.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, and I don&#8217;t believe AAC has &#8220;smaller file sizes&#8221; &#8211; isn&#8217;t the bitrate the literal amount of data contained in a file?  So the same 5 minute song in 256 MP3 and 256 AAC should be the same file size, no?</p>
<p>I think the argument should be that AAC sounds as good as MP3 at a *lower bitrate*, making for a smaller file size.  But since we&#8217;re assumedly comparing iTunes Plus (256 kbps) AAC to  Amazon MP3 (256 kbps), the file sizes should be similar if not identical.  But the iTunes Plus song should sound *better*.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Quix</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338040</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Quix]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 05:36:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338040</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;I think a lot of my tracks are going to be $.69 come April 1&quot;

Oh Tom, Tom, Tom...you realize which tracks are going to be $.69 don&#039;t you?  The obscure, worthless songs that no one will ever buy.  Crap songs you&#039;ve never heard of from artists you&#039;ve never heard of.

All the good stuff will start at $.99, just like now, with the songs you *really* want sitting comfortably at $1.29.

You&#039;d think we&#039;d all understand how record label weasels operate by now...

Variable pricing, puh-lease.  Anyone who thinks this is a consumer-friendly gesture is frighteningly naive.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I think a lot of my tracks are going to be $.69 come April 1&#8243;</p>
<p>Oh Tom, Tom, Tom&#8230;you realize which tracks are going to be $.69 don&#8217;t you?  The obscure, worthless songs that no one will ever buy.  Crap songs you&#8217;ve never heard of from artists you&#8217;ve never heard of.</p>
<p>All the good stuff will start at $.99, just like now, with the songs you *really* want sitting comfortably at $1.29.</p>
<p>You&#8217;d think we&#8217;d all understand how record label weasels operate by now&#8230;</p>
<p>Variable pricing, puh-lease.  Anyone who thinks this is a consumer-friendly gesture is frighteningly naive.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicholas Joerger</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338041</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nicholas Joerger]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 05:11:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338041</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I dont know if this is place to post this but

I have A LOT OF MUSIC and its not DRM and its over the amount Tom has (sorry dont feel like sharing that info with the world)

should i convert to acc to save room or stay in ogg, flac, mp3, mp4, wav, etc?
curious]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I dont know if this is place to post this but</p>
<p>I have A LOT OF MUSIC and its not DRM and its over the amount Tom has (sorry dont feel like sharing that info with the world)</p>
<p>should i convert to acc to save room or stay in ogg, flac, mp3, mp4, wav, etc?<br />
curious</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Reestman</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338037</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Reestman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 01:05:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338037</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nick,

Yes, you can burn protected DRM files to an Audio CD and re-rip them as DRM-free MP3s (since burning to Audio removes the DRM). But with Apple&#039;s DRM-free tracks you don&#039;t even have to burn them first; you can &quot;convert&quot; them to MP3 directly in iTunes.

However, it makes ZERO sense to do this if your device supports AAC, and chances are it does. See the link below for a partial list of supported devices:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Audio_Coding#Hardware

I think people get the impression that AAC support is rare. It&#039;s not.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nick,</p>
<p>Yes, you can burn protected DRM files to an Audio CD and re-rip them as DRM-free MP3s (since burning to Audio removes the DRM). But with Apple&#8217;s DRM-free tracks you don&#8217;t even have to burn them first; you can &#8220;convert&#8221; them to MP3 directly in iTunes.</p>
<p>However, it makes ZERO sense to do this if your device supports AAC, and chances are it does. See the link below for a partial list of supported devices:</p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Audio_Coding#Hardware" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Audio_Coding#Hardware</a></p>
<p>I think people get the impression that AAC support is rare. It&#8217;s not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338036</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nick]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:13:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338036</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I haven&#039;t purchased much from Itunes, but can&#039;t you just burn a CD of DRM files and then rip it back to itunes as mp3s to upgrade to drm-free yourself?

There are definitely players that don&#039;t play AAC, but play OGG, which is also smaller and better sounding than mp3s.  Nothing against AAC, but for many people with slightly older players they haven&#039;t worked.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I haven&#8217;t purchased much from Itunes, but can&#8217;t you just burn a CD of DRM files and then rip it back to itunes as mp3s to upgrade to drm-free yourself?</p>
<p>There are definitely players that don&#8217;t play AAC, but play OGG, which is also smaller and better sounding than mp3s.  Nothing against AAC, but for many people with slightly older players they haven&#8217;t worked.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Allister</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338035</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Allister]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 23:12:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338035</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I second Galley&#039;s comment.  I&#039;ve got a few dozen and it has so far offered to upgrade three.  So I did.

And hooray for your rant about AAC-doomsayers.  Take a look on Wikipedia at the AAC page - there&#039;s a list of hardware &amp; software that supports this TEN YEAR OLD standard.  Damned near everything worth owning.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I second Galley&#8217;s comment.  I&#8217;ve got a few dozen and it has so far offered to upgrade three.  So I did.</p>
<p>And hooray for your rant about AAC-doomsayers.  Take a look on Wikipedia at the AAC page &#8211; there&#8217;s a list of hardware &amp; software that supports this TEN YEAR OLD standard.  Damned near everything worth owning.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Galley</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-itunes-pricing-and-drm-removal-questions/#comment-338034</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Galley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:52:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=14641#comment-338034</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Makes me glad I never bought more than a handful of tracks with DRM.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Makes me glad I never bought more than a handful of tracks with DRM.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

