BuyMusic Customers Can't Transfer Songs To Players

  • Posted: 29 July 2003 10:01 AM

    USA Today is reporting that buyers of music through BuyMusic.com’s service have been unable to transfer songs to their mp3 players. Although BuyMusic insists the problem will be (is) fixed, this is not a good start to what was billed as a cheap and easy to use service.

    IMHO this is better advertising for iTMS than Apple could have purchased.

         
  • Posted: 29 July 2003 11:13 AM #1

    [Snicker, snort]

    I shouldn’t laugh.  It isn’t nice to make fun of dumb critters.

    Must.  Not.  Laugh…  BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

    [Wipes eyes]  Oh my, that felt so good it almost hurt.  Fools.  You want shortsighted and ugly, you got shortsighted and ugly.  And it doesn’t even work right.  Why are we not surprised?

    [Snort]  No!  No laughing!

         
  • Posted: 29 July 2003 11:41 AM #2

    I might have laughed if it was unexpected, but it’s not.

    Signature

    Common Sense Ain’t.

         
  • Posted: 29 July 2003 11:42 AM #3

    I hate to mention this, but doesn’t the iTMS only sync to the iPOD? Granted the iPOD is the best music player on the market, but wouldn’t these same players not be able to use the iTMS downloaded songs?

    I wonder if iTMS for Windows will also only sync to iPODs?

         
  • Posted: 29 July 2003 01:10 PM #4

    [quote author=“JimWCB”]

    I wonder if iTMS for Windows will also only sync to iPODs?

    I would think so. The iTMS in and of itself is not a money maker for Apple. Apple’s reward is the sale of iPods to consumers. Making iTMS work with a non-Apple player would be a foolish mistake.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 29 July 2003 03:31 PM #5

    I think the difference between the limit that iTMS can only transfer to iPods and BuyMusic’s statements is this:  iTMS does what it promised.  Sure, it might not make the iTMS service as appealing as it would be if you could transfer songs to any MP3 player, but it does as promised.  (And don’t forget that iTMS is AAC, so many other players just don’t support the format.)  To launch a service that is as restrictive as BuyMusic’s and then have it not work as advertised is truly annoying.  I feel sorry for the people that have bought into the BuyMusic service.

    Signature

    According to statistics, half the world is below average intelligence
    "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."-George Bernard Shaw
    "You can’t change that by gettin’ all…bendy."

         
  • Posted: 29 July 2003 05:15 PM #6

    According to the news story many buyers will have to redownload the songs in order for the music to be moved to a mp3 player.

    I looked at the BuyMusic.com site today. IMHO it looks like a cheap ripoff of iTMS without the Apple touch. Perhaps this business is more difficult than they originally thought?

         
  • Posted: 29 July 2003 06:18 PM #7

    Things just get worse and worse for BuyMusic.com.

    To have your name dragged through the mud so much in your first few weeks of operation is never good. In their case, I can’t really say it’s not deserved, though.

    On top of software restrictions and inability to transfer files and outages at launch, there are now allegations that they obtained their music through some questionable means and many artists won’t see a penny from the purchases.

    Absolutely crazy.

    Signature

    Colin

         
  • Posted: 29 July 2003 08:03 PM #8

    Oh, oh, oh!

    (I’m a former record lable exec.). It appears that BuyMusic might be distributing product for which the source may not have the right to grant distribution permission for online sales. That is if the account of events described in the link posted above is accurate.

    Not all songs are available through BuyMusic are sold at $.79. BuyMusic may actually be more expensive than the Apple Music store for popular tracks.

    If (and I say if) music is being sourced for sale from distributors who have not been given rights to distribute music online there will be very big problems.

    I could say a lot more on this matter but I will refrain until additional facts are known.

         
  • Posted: 30 July 2003 12:42 AM #9

    And how about Buymusic’s email response: “We are unable to provide technical assistance after you have downloaded the music ... to your primary computer. In addition, we are unable to credit you back for failed or damaged copies once you have successfully downloaded the music.”

    This is just surreal.

         
  • Posted: 30 July 2003 08:01 AM #10

    [quote author=“algernon”]And how about Buymusic’s email response: “We are unable to provide technical assistance after you have downloaded the music ... to your primary computer. In addition, we are unable to credit you back for failed or damaged copies once you have successfully downloaded the music.”

    This is just surreal.

    It looks like a seriously flawed business model and/or a service rushed to market too quickly. There’s no way to recoup costs in a substantial way from downloads alone if artists and labels are properly compensated for the sales.

         
  • Posted: 30 July 2003 08:24 AM #11

    Don’t laugh guys, there’s not much of a selection to choose from in the download music purchase world. These people where trying a new product but that product failed. I can only relate to them when I go out and buy the latest piece of technology only to find out that it’s not as good as it’s set out to be or that it will fall due to unpopularity (i.e. G4 Cube (too expensive), Newton (too ahead of its time), Pippin (too expensive/no 3rd party support), 20th Anniversary Mac (faulty sound system), Mac Soundblaster (sucky support and drivers for OS 9 and none for X), harman/kardon iSub (Apple still can’t get it right on X) and so on). these people are if anything pioneers, explorers in the digital age.

    Now, if iTMS existed on the PC side and people still regardless of bad reviews shopped buymusic.com then yeah, laugh at them. Till then, just learn from them.

    Signature

    A Mac Daddy in a new level.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 30 July 2003 09:20 AM #12

    [quote author=“DawnTreader”]It looks like a seriously flawed business model and/or a service rushed to market too quickly. There’s no way to recoup costs in a substantial way from downloads alone if artists and labels are properly compensated for the sales.

    Another problem is the flawed approach to the perception of the customers that they present.  DRM in general treats the customer as a criminal, and they the material they are getting must be protected or otherwise they are sure to be misused.  That really turns off many people in the first place.  For those not instantly turned off by DRM, have DRM that does not work as promised is likely to annoy them as well.  The point here is not to treat the userbase as if they are doing something wrong off the bat.  (Oddly enough, this point was originally succesfully argued at work while we were determining how the new phpbb forums we were setting up would work.)  I’m not fond of DRM in general, but at least Apple trys to please the customer with iTMS.

    Signature

    According to statistics, half the world is below average intelligence
    "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."-George Bernard Shaw
    "You can’t change that by gettin’ all…bendy."

         
  • Posted: 30 July 2003 10:20 AM #13

    Not to be an obnoxious devil’s advocate, but it would be nice if other music players besides the iPod could play the iTunes AAC files.

    In any case, I’ve largely taken a “deny existence” attitude towards BuyMusic.com.  I feel that after their CEO publicly attacked the iPod and just generally acted like a petulent child, it’s not something I need to care about.

    Signature

    "We need to talk.  Step into my office, baby!"
    -Belle and Sebastian