iTunes Plus Ugrades | The Popjustice Forum

iTunes Plus Ugrades

Discussion in 'Pop & Justice' started by type:epyt, Apr 7, 2009.

  1. All songs now 256kbps, DRM free ... and they are nice enough to allow you to upgrade any (well some at any rate) previous purchases to iTunes Plus ... FOR A PRICE ...

    Maybe i'm just fussy or a skinflint or something but i think they have an absolute cheek charging for you to upgrade old purchases ... especially when some tracks were already 256kbps for 79p and others were 128kbps for the same price and you had no choice to pay more or less for that quality (The Loving Kind from GA's Out Of Control being a good example) ...

    i know the old 'you never get something for nothing' addage but in the case of iTunes they should take some responsibility for what the have put out in the past and what value that offered ...

    what's anyone else's take on this?
  2. Personally i wouldn't be arsed to upgrade to the higher sound quality - especially as you have to pay for that. I don't care that much about the difference (although i know it matters a lot to some people)

    Most of the files on my iTunes are off CD anyways
  3. If it's a song I absolutely love, it was originally 128kps, and I haven't subsequently got it on CD or on Amazon mp3, then I'll upgrade.

    The above applied to a grand total of one previous iTunes purchase I made.

  4. It's really poor that iTunes sold songs at 128kbps, but I have to say I find this whole 256kbps stuff quite odd.

    Most people cannot hear the difference between a 192kbps and 256kbps encoded song.

    In fact, I re-encode all of my music above 192kbps down to 192kbps. It's the best balance between quality and file size. Heh.
  5. there is an audible difference if you play your ipod through your hi-fi or burn the tracks to audio disc ... with headphones not so much ...
  6. I don't understand Apple's strategy at all.

    Amazon's mp3s are getting cheaper (the high profile new stuff, at least)..some are 29p!

    Non-legal downloads are getting easier to access.

    So, what do they do?

    Offer to charge you again for finally providing decent bit-rate quality, and then increase the price of singles.

    Nice one.

  7. Apple's strategy has nothing to do with it. The pricing structure change has come at the insistance of the labels, not Apple who have fought to maintain a single flat-rate for all tracks.

    I don't know how Amazon are getting away with selling the songs so cheap - I think there is more to the situation than meets the eye.
  8. ^ Possibly, yes. I remember reading something about that a while back. Although in my experience Apple's attitude to customer satisfaction leaves a lot to be desired anyway. They're a shambles, and always have been. It's just until recently they've had very little (official) competition, so people have generally tended to put up with the crappy service, buggy updates, 128kps DRM, etc.

  9. Well I've never had a problem getting a refund from Apple over a iTunes matter... ever. Infact I've never had a problem with Apple's customer support.

    People do try to paint Apple as the villain of the piece (DRM, now the pricing problems), but these issues came directly from the labels and were written into the contracts, not from Apple's end. Jobs has said on numerous occasions that customers want a file they can do what the fuck they like with, in a good quality and at a fair price. He even wrote that open letter calling for an end to DRM.

    Amazon are being underhanded - I read that the labels have let some of the issues they hold with Apple slide with Amazon, because iTunes has too big a share of the digital download market and has been able to strong-arm the labels into making compromises (again, DRM, pre-releases etc.). Amazon are only selling 100 tracks at the cut rate, not their entire library - and are treating the reductions as a loss-leader. It's no coincidence both these pricing changes have happened at the same time - Amazon know they are pissing all over Apple in PR terms.
  10. Well, personally I have never been refused a refund for a faulty/incorrect download either, but just seeing the way that hundreds (thousands?) of users are left high and dry every time a new iTunes upgrade kills the service for days on end, without any sensible advice from the support team, seriously pissed me off. They know what's fcuking up everybody's ipods, syncing, ability to purchase, whatever...yet they never ever acknowledge that. Because they're obviously scared off losing customers if they say "yep, sorry, we've fucked up the service for X days and that's that".

    I think a lot of the perceived animosity towards Apple comes from stuff like that, and the way anyone who buys an iPod and/or uses iTunes is basically at their mercy on a lot of issues.

  11. Tribal Spaceman

    Tribal Spaceman Staff Member

    The iTunes store is just terrible.
  12. I find comments like this strange... why is it so terrible? It's probably the slickest intergrated music service out there and very smooth and easy. It's also got the most exclusive content and pretty much, now that the tracks have been upgraded to 256kbps AAC, the best sound quality out of the major download services.

    Also at least Apple are allowing you to upgrade your tracks. What about all the songs bought from 7digital and the OD2 group before they all went to MP3? If you want to upgrade the original protected WMA files purchased from those services the only way you can do it is to buy the track again. At least with iTunes you only have to pay 20p and now you can simply select the tracks you want upgrade without doing the whole lot. 20p isn't a great deal for a better quality, DRM free file upgrade in my opinion. Imagine the bandwidth bill Apple would have to foot if they allowed every single previously downloaded track to be re-downloaded in the higher quality (= double the size) format. It would be HUGE!
  13. multimediac17

    multimediac17 Moderator

    I don't shop at iTunes and I wouldn't set foot in there if it were a bricks-and-mortar store. It'd be so messy!
  14. I just noticed that the new 59p, 79p and 99p prices have just come into force on iTunes. Doesn't really bother me to be honest, and it's not Apple's fault. If a label decides to price something at 99p, then of course they're going to take a hit in terms of sales. There are plenty of other online stores about and if you shop around between iTunes, Amazon, 7Digital, Play and HMV you can save quite a few pennies.

    The only thing that does concern me is the effect on the charts. The flat-rate download policy provided a pretty level playing field for all artists, but now those that charge 59p are going to have a big advantage over those that charge 99p.
  15. Interesting point, although it's the same as when CD singles ranged in price from £0.99 to £3.99 regardless of their tracklisting, so I shouldn't think it will effect peoples buying decision too much.
  16. Tribal Spaceman

    Tribal Spaceman Staff Member

    Yet another reason that maxi single should still exist...
  17. The maxi single does still exist...
  18. Tribal Spaceman

    Tribal Spaceman Staff Member

    Most record labels are doing those silly 1 and 2 track ones, even when there's loads of remixes on the promos.
  19. Liam, for someone who seems to be so against the digital format, your profile would suggest you listen to the a big proportion of your music through a computer or an iPod rather than physical formats you seem to say you prefer.

    I don't mind people preferring the physical format over digital, but it does always seem a lot of people on here seem to dislike the idea of losing the physical format for sentimental reasons more than anything.

    Anyways, iTunes: It's actually very, very good. I personally purchase very little from there though. I get it from my Napster subscription for much cheaper.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.