Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Hybrid] Re: OT : Paid downloads vs purchases & bonus tracks/material

Expand Messages
  • Andy Grundman
    The correct way to handle this kind of thing is to tie your purchased files to a user account, so you can come back to the website and download all the files
    Message 1 of 10 , Oct 6, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      The correct way to handle this kind of thing is to tie your purchased
      files to a user account, so you can come back to the website and
      download all the files you've ever purchased if you happen to lose the
      file. Amazon does this for their "digital downloads" area.

      -Andy

      Phil Stewart wrote:

      > On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, devjonazure wrote:
      >
      >>Personally, I don't think music downloads will ever catch on as a
      >>profitable venture, due to 1) who wants to pay for something that can
      >>easily be deleted, and you have to listen to on your comp? (unless you
      >>just burn to cd anyway) and 2) the quality of mp3 is so low that any
      >>real music lover would never be content with it anyway.
      >
      >
      > To respond to point 1, I would be willing to pay for smething I might
      > accidently end up deleting (knowing me, that's more than possible), as
      > long as the price was sufficiently low, and the track was sufficiently
      > rare. I wouldn't object to having to shell out another 50p, *maybe* as far
      > as a pound. Any more than that, and I would have to think twice, but then
      > any more than that and I probably wouldn't have bought it in the first
      > place.
      >
      > To respond to point 2, there is nothing wrong with the quality of mp3 at a
      > sufficiently high bitrate encoded with a sufficiently good encoder. For
      > me, 192kbps lame encoded mp3 is easily adequate, and the amount of loss is
      > negligible. Failing that, 256kbps mp3 will beat 256kbps mp2, and 256kbps
      > mp2 is widely considered to be of broadcast standard. So I guess, as a
      > real music lover (if I can classify myself as such), I *would* be content
      > with something ultra-rare that was well encoded, rather then having to put
      > up with either a sh*te copy that's been encoded using a sock, or worse
      > still no copy at all.
      >
      > --
      >>From Phil
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.