Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Nov 23, 2007, 11:21 AM

I just downloaded my first album from Amazon MP3 and I am very happy so far. I also saved $1 since it was $8.99 on Amazon and $9.99 on iTunes. The quality is great and the download was easy. I needed to install the Amazon downloader for Mac OS X, and then all the songs were added to iTunes automatically.

My only question is...I noticed a new folder was created in Music > Amazon MP3 where the new album was saved. The same album is also in the iTunes folder too. Does this mean I now have two copies of it on the hard drive?

There is an option in the Amazon Downloader to change the default folder in which it saves music. Should I change it to the iTunes folder directly to prevent this? Can I delete the Amazon MP3 folder since the album is also in the iTunes folder now?

Mithras · Nov 23, 2007, 11:38 AM

This is an interaction of two things: having iTunes set to copy music into its music library, and having a separate download location for the Amazon music. Yes, if you download directly to the iTunes folder, then iTunes will reorganize (move) the songs, but not copy them.

macintologist · Dec 12, 2007, 12:06 AM

I wanted to bump this thread to say that I also bought some tracks on Amazon and am very happy with it. I downloaded a couple of Daft Punk songs from p2p and the quality sucked, and these were songs I really liked. I could have gotten them from iTunes but the DRM is pissing me off because I can't share it with family members like my mom who just has a different iTunes authorization account. So I can't share tunes with her that I like from iTunes. I love the lack of DRM on Amazon, it makes the doubled file size worth it. The quality is great too.

EndlessMac · Dec 12, 2007, 01:28 AM

Originally Posted by macintologist

I could have gotten them from iTunes but the DRM is pissing me off because I can't share it with family members like my mom who just has a different iTunes authorization account. I love the lack of DRM on Amazon, it makes the doubled file size worth it. The quality is great too.

I also prefer Amazon downloads over iTunes also. iTunes does have some DRM free music but not enough. All of Amazon's music are DRM free and as you said the quality is pretty good too.

When will they learn that having DRM and other restrictions is only pissing off people who are willing to buy their stuff? If they know anything about file sharing they should know that it only takes one person to share the file so it's pretty much impossible to fully control who gets their stuff. Those people probably won't buy their stuff anyway so why piss off people who are willing to?

One problem I'm having with iTunes music is that iTunes is the only program that can burn them into an audio CD to play in my car. For some reason iTunes is having problems making them playable in my car but I've had no problems with Toast on my non-iTunes downloads.

CatOne · Dec 12, 2007, 01:58 PM

Apple would offer all the music DRM free as well, if they could. But the studios won't let them. Don't blame Apple on this.

EndlessMac · Dec 12, 2007, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by CatOne

Apple would offer all the music DRM free as well, if they could. But the studios won't let them. Don't blame Apple on this.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I wasn't blaming Apple but the music industry. Although I applaud Amazon for only offering the few DRM free music instead of the mix of DRM free and DRM music. Basically Amazon is telling the music industry that people are only willing to buy DRM free music.

Person Man · Dec 12, 2007, 02:20 PM

Originally Posted by EndlessMac

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I wasn't blaming Apple but the music industry. Although I applaud Amazon for only offering the few DRM free music instead of the mix of DRM free and DRM music. Basically Amazon is telling the music industry that people are only willing to buy DRM free music.

Amazon is not telling the music industry anything. If Apple, the dominant music download store, cannot convince the music industry, what makes you think Amazon can?

Universal is deliberately not selling it's DRM free tracks via iTunes, because they're trying to "punish" them because of greed on the part of their CEO.

To be fair, Amazon only has songs from EMI and Universal in their store. Warner and Sony BMG have not entered the DRM-free fray. And Universal has only committed to a "six month trial."

Hopefully Universal will consider their DRM-free "experiment" a "success" and then start offering them elsewhere. I think Sony BMG and Warner are waiting to see how EMI and Universal fare before offering their own DRM-free stuff.

slugslugslug · Dec 12, 2007, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by Person Man

To be fair, Amazon only has songs from EMI and Universal in their store. Warner and Sony BMG have not entered the DRM-free fray...

And tons of indie-label stuff that is on iTunes, but with DRM. There are clearly plenty of small labels selling their stuff DRM-free, on Amazon, eMusic, etc., but most haven't gotten onto iTunes Plus yet. (I'm not even sure if anything on iTunes Plus is not from EMI)

Person Man · Dec 12, 2007, 03:14 PM

Originally Posted by slugslugslug

And tons of indie-label stuff that is on iTunes, but with DRM. There are clearly plenty of small labels selling their stuff DRM-free, on Amazon, eMusic, etc., but most haven't gotten onto iTunes Plus yet. (I'm not even sure if anything on iTunes Plus is not from EMI)

There is some DRM free indie label stuff on iTunes, but not a lot. Each label has to negotiate with Apple first, and I imagine that some are allowing it, and some aren't.

You can bet that all the indie labels will follow suit if the "big four" all go DRM free.

EndlessMac · Dec 12, 2007, 06:44 PM

Originally Posted by Person Man

Amazon is not telling the music industry anything. If Apple, the dominant music download store, cannot convince the music industry, what makes you think Amazon can?

The fact that Apple chose to make available DRM music is supporting the cause of DRM. Amazon chose not to which means that 100% of the sales from Amazon will be DRM free. If no venders chooses to support DRM music by selling them then don't you think the music industry won't cave into the demand when their only sales are DRM free music?

Of course the biggest facter is up to us because if no one buys DRM music then the industry will be forced to change. It's a lot easier to not buy DRM music if there are none available which is my point. I no longer buy DRM music.

Kenneth · Dec 12, 2007, 11:21 PM

Did anyone actually read the Amazon MP3 Downloads term of use? I heard it's pretty bad.

So far, I purchased 3 tracks from Amazon MP3 Downloads. It's not bad, but not great neither. Lack of content and funky web UI are the reasons why I'm not a full time Amazon MP3 Downloads user. Meanwhile, you don't have to use that program in order to download song.

Person Man · Dec 13, 2007, 02:08 PM

Originally Posted by EndlessMac

The fact that Apple chose to make available DRM music is supporting the cause of DRM.

Um, no. Apple didn't "choose" to make DRM music available. The music labels made them. Basically they said, "if you don't make DRM available, we won't let you sell our songs." Fast forward to 2007. EMI says, "OK, we'll let you sell our songs DRM free." Apple starts doing it.

Amazon chose not to which means that 100% of the sales from Amazon will be DRM free.

Amazon chose not to only AFTER the labels allowed it. There would have been no store if EMI and Universal hadn't agreed to sell their tracks DRM free on the store.

You might ask why Apple isn't selling Universal's songs DRM free? Because Universal won't let them.

And besides, Universal is only doing this on a six month "trial basis." At the end of that six months, they'll make an assessment and see if it's worth it. If not, then Universal will not let Amazon sell its songs DRM free. And if there is only one major label on the MP3 store, it might not be profitable for them to continue it.

If no venders chooses to support DRM music by selling them then don't you think the music industry won't cave into the demand when their only sales are DRM free music?

Until recently, vendOrs didn't have a choice. DRM or no sell music. Apple is under contract with the other labels to sell their music at this point. You can bet that if they could sell Universal's music without DRM they would. And Sony BMG and Warner are watching Universal's experiment closely.

If it works out, then Sony BMG's and Warner's music will be made available on Amazon's store, and Apple's, if they let Amazon and Apple do it.

Then one of two things will happen once all labels are allowing songs to be sold DRM free:

1. Sony BMG and Warner will immediately join EMI in allowing Apple to sell their songs without DRM, making Universal look bad, forcing them to follow suit.

OR

2. Sony BMG and Warner will join Universal in saying to Apple, "allow variable pricing or we won't let you sell our songs without DRM." Then EMI might follow suit.

If Apple caves, then they'll go to Amazon and demand the same thing.

EndlessMac · Dec 13, 2007, 06:12 PM

Originally Posted by Person Man

Um, no. Apple didn't "choose" to make DRM music available. The music labels made them.

Sorry choose is not the right word. It's more that since Apple does have both DRM and DRM free music it supports the cause of DRM. Again I'm not blaming Apple. Their system has been established but whether they like it or not having DRM on their site will only increase DRM sales.

Originally Posted by Person Man

Amazon chose not to only AFTER the labels allowed it. There would have been no store if EMI and Universal hadn't agreed to sell their tracks DRM free on the store.

Yes agreed but the key words are that Amazon did chose not to sell DRM music, because they started selling digital music at a time when they could get DRM free music. Whether that was intentional is not a point I really care about but the end result is that their music is 100% DRM free, which is what I care about.

Originally Posted by Person Man

And besides, Universal is only doing this on a six month "trial basis." At the end of that six months, they'll make an assessment and see if it's worth it. If not, then Universal will not let Amazon sell its songs DRM free.

Which is my point all along. Since Amazon has only DRM free music people don't get tempted or ignorantly buy DRM music without realizing what they are doing. Whether Apple or Amazon chose to make their music DRM free or not is not the issue I'm making, it's more about the need to limit the options to only DRM free music whenever possible. As of right now Amazon is the only digital music store I know that does that.

If Apple has a contract with the other record labels then so be it but the fact that they also have DRM music available is supporting the cause of DRM whether Apple likes that or not. That's not an argument but more of a statement of the present situation.

peeb · Dec 13, 2007, 07:03 PM

The important thing is that the genie is out of the bottle. Given the choice, no one will buy DRM. With any luck it will become increasingly difficult for companies to sell anything with DRM. This is, incidentally, why the Kindle must die, too.

slugslugslug · Dec 13, 2007, 07:18 PM

Originally Posted by EndlessMac

... it's more about the need to limit the options to only DRM free music whenever possible. As of right now Amazon is the only digital music store I know that does that.

Several digital music stores only sell mp3. CalabashMusic.com specializes in international folk-ish music, as does Smithsonian Global Sound's store. Those and some others are really low-profile. But eMusic has a pretty huge, completely DRM-free catalog, with lots of well-known indie labels. I think they got EMI tracks shortly after EMI's big announcement, too.

I think eMusic has had a pretty significant following, but I wouldn't be surprised if they get hurt badly by Amazon mp3. eMusic had a subscription model where you pay a recurring monthly fee for a set number of downloads, with no rollover. If you used up your allotment every month, the price was great, as low as a quarter a track. I know there are people who spend a chunk of every paycheck on new music anyway, so they could probably make it worthwhile. But for people like me and my wife, if go a month or two without knowing what to buy, eMusic makes 15-30 bucks for nothing. I imagine that's how they turn any sort of profit...

Anyway, I'm babbling. But my experience with Amazon mp3 has been great. Close enough to iTunes in ease of use that I'll always check Amazon first until Apple ditches DRM completely (if it ever happens).

mduell · Dec 13, 2007, 07:41 PM

Apple didn't offer a DRM-free option to the indie labels when they were setting up the store, so it wasn't just the record companies pushing DRM.

peeb · Dec 13, 2007, 08:32 PM

The big labels did insist that ALL material be DRMed initially, not just their own, IIRC.

Chuckit · Dec 13, 2007, 08:39 PM

I don't think Apple formulated the least restrictive DRM scheme in existence because they're big fans of locking down music.

Originally Posted by EndlessMac

Yes agreed but the key words are that Amazon did chose not to sell DRM music, because they started selling digital music at a time when they could get DRM free music.

You mean "a time when the labels were looking for a company they could set up as a rival to Apple that, unlike Apple, will be willing to implement horribly draconian DRM as soon as possible." In summary:

mduell · Dec 14, 2007, 08:39 PM

Originally Posted by peeb

The big labels did insist that ALL material be DRMed initially, not just their own, IIRC.

Can you source that? If that's true, wow, Apple really bent over for them.

Chuckit · Dec 14, 2007, 09:04 PM

Apple was already bending over for them by having DRM at all. It seems like people often assume Apple was trying to lock people into the fledgling platform, but I recall Jobs said from the beginning that he thought DRM was a tactical disadvantage, because neither of the iTunes Music Store's main competitors (CDs and piracy) carried a similar burden.

peeb · Dec 15, 2007, 02:06 AM

I can't source it, and I may be wrong on that, it's just my recollection.

poocat · Dec 15, 2007, 10:49 PM

Who cares, Amazon's MP3 service is awesome. No more iTunes, especially since I've really started to have problems w/ the 5 computer limit (as I upgrade office and home systems, but still occasionally use them).

DRM is so lame.

Copywriter · Dec 19, 2007, 12:36 AM

I also tried Amazon's service the other day. I love it. I ended up buying about 10 albums.

It's great that you get MP3s. I can easily port them to another machine, such as my PS3, which is a media machine for me. And their downloading app is nice.

The extra savings over iTunes is a plus too.