adamyntium

Category: technology

  • iTunes — a review of the music service and music player

    After checking out the following music services — Rhapsody, MusicNow, PressPlay, MusicMatch and Napster 2.0 — I have now spent some time playing with iTunes.

    As with MusicMatch (“MM”), iTunes must be looked at from the perspective of a player and a service.

    The iTunes Player
    Let’s get the player out of the way first. It dramatically pales in comparison to other players out there, including WinAmp, MM, and even Windows Media Player. It substitutes simplicity for flexibility and power, and that’s not even good for non-power users, IMHO.

    NOTE: I’ve tempered my negative opinion of the player a bit. See the addendum at the end of this review for details.

    Installation
    Pleasantly straightforward and acceptably speedy on a broadband connection. My only gripe is that iTunes forced a QuickTime thingy into my systray (without giving me an initial option to refuse), and this IMHO is simply unacceptable. I was, however, able to disable this by right-clicking the qt icon, selecting PREFERENCES, then unchecking the ‘load at startup’ option.

    Selection
    Seems to be about on par with MM and Rhapsody, and a bit behind Napster overall. However, iTunes did seem to have some newer releases (the “Avenue Q” soundtrack) that were missing on the other services, and, like Napster, it does offer some ‘exclusives.’

    Ease of downloading
    This is an absolute tie. Each of the services offers both one-click and one-click-with-confirm download options. Each service allowed me to download a tune quickly, easily, and for just under a buck.

    Burning, moving to a portable player
    I have not yet tried burning an iTunes track to a CD, but like with the other services, the process appears to be intuitive and painless.

    Unfortunately, unlike the other services, iTunes portable music player support is severely limited. Specifically, iTunes lets you move your music to any player… as long as it’s an iPod. I wonder if this will change over time?

    Searching for specific music
    iTunes wins, and by a mile. First of all, it defaults to “search all” mode… meaning you can type in an artist or a song or an album, so you can just search for whatever comes to mind without having to mess with options. That rocks! Even better yet, iTunes has a power-search mode, which IMHO is so damn obvious and so necessary that it’s completely baffling why no other service has implemented this yet.

    Discovering new music
    In contrast with searching, iTunes falls in dead last when it comes to discovering music. While Napster offers amazingly cool tools to see who else is streaming or has downloaded tracks or albums you like and also lets you check out others’ complete music collections, iTunes offers nothing of the sort.

    iTunes also does not offer any options to pay a flat monthly fee to listen to hundreds of thousands of songs in their entirety.

    One saving “discovery” grace of iTunes is that its 30-second clips start almost the instant you click a link… much better than most of the other services, and even a hair faster than the already-laudable Listen.com service. It’s a shame that any music preview gets canceled if you happen to click on any other iTunes link while it’s playing (e.g., if you check out info on another artist, the preview you’re playing will halt).

    Music sound quality and compatibility
    I can’t really tell the difference, frankly, between the purchased and downloaded clips from MM, Napster, and iTunes, but this may be due to the fact that I don’t have an excellent sound system, and I haven’t downloaded songs that’d really test the range of music out there. I will note that others (rightly or wrongly) have suggested that AAC (which iTunes uses) is a superior format, soundwise, to WMA (which all the other services use).

    Unfortunately, AAC is not nearly as well-supported on Windows. I tried playing my downloaded iTunes clip on the default Windows Media Player 9, and it didn’t work. The newest MM player wouldn’t play it. And my friend’s 2.91 WinAmp choked on it, too (though apparently the next version in that series — 2.92 — will play these files, and I’m betting WinAmp 3.0 can manage the files, too).

    Radio
    iTunes piggy-backs onto some unspecified Internet radio source. There’s no original iTunes programming, and many of the Internet radio sources linked to are of very, very poor sound quality (low bandwidth streaming). Luckily, iTunes does not bill itself as a great place to listen to Internet radio; it’s merely an extra. MM has the best radio service by far, followed by Rhapsody, and then Napster; Napster has the most FLEXIBLE Radio implementation, but it’s hobbled by oft-repeated tunes and less-than-stellar music choices.

    —

    CONCLUSION:
    iTunes for Windows is definitely for you if…
    – you have an iPod or plan on getting one
    – you have a strong preference for AAC over WMA
    – you already know and like the Mac iTunes (the Win version is almost identical, I’ve been told)
    – you want to take advantage of iTunes’ exclusive tracks
    – you often are trying to search for specific, hard-to-find tracks

    Otherwise, I’d recommend that you check out…
    – Rhapsody, for the cleanest and most intuitive interface
    – MusicMatch, for the best radio and most powerful player / music service combo
    – Napster, for the biggest selection, best portable player compatibility, and most robust community features

    Best yet, check out all the services for yourself! Like me, you may find that you wish to keep one or more on hand, depending on your interests and needs on any given day. Overall, I think Napster is the strongest offering at this time, but I actually plan to keep MM and iTunes around, too šŸ™‚

    —

    NOTE:
    I will post a comprehensive Napster review (perhaps broken up into several parts, because it’s already so long!), beginning within the next three days, so make sure to stop back here šŸ™‚

    —

    Related entries:
    – BuyMusic… run away, run away!
    – Mini-review of Listen.com’s Rhapsody
    – Review of MusicMatch’s download service
    – My concept of an ideal music service

    —

    Edited to add:
    The more I play with the iTunes player, the more it grows on me. While I’m still hugely frustrated by the lack of right-click functionality, the drag and drop is much better than most Windows programs, and iTunes also offers considerably more keyboard shortcuts than many other players.

    Additionally, it IS just the first Windows version of the client, so I should cut it some slack.

    So my earlier total-pan of iTunes should be tempered a bit šŸ˜‰

  • Comments are now back

    Ack! I was just informed (Thanks, Bee!) that y’all have been unable to post comments for weeks now. Why didn’t someone tell me before? Aaaaaaaagh!

    And here I was feeling so unloved. :O

    —

    On a more substantive note… stay tuned (e.g., add this page to your Favorites) because within 10 days, I’ll be posting some very informative and DETAILED inside info on the new (legal!) Napster 2.0. Most mere mortals cannot try the service out until October 29th, but yours truly… bwah hah hah hah! I will tell all šŸ˜‰ For those who are impatient, you can at least read my earlier intro to the Napster service here.

  • Napster’s (sort of) back — and it’s not half-bad

    As a former paying subscriber of Roxio’s PressPlay (which has transitioned into Napster), I’ve been invited to beta test the new Napster 2.0. To my knowledge, there are no prohibitions on me talking about it at all to others, so here goes a few thoughts of mine šŸ™‚

    First of all, if you’ve used PressPlay, Napster 2.0 (henceforth Napster) will look and feel VERY familiar, albeit with much more polish and a tad more functionality.

    Here are the basics:

    – Right now, it’s for Windows users only šŸ™

    – Any Windows users can download the special Napster client software, or use Napster via Windows Media Player 9 (though with a bit less functionality)

    – It costs nothing to download the software, and you can also get unlimited 30 second song previews for free, plus lots of really good artist info.

    – Like with iTunes and Musicmatch, you can pay 99 cents for a ‘portable’ download, and from there, you can burn the track to a CD or send it to a secure-WMA-supporting portable device.

    – If you opt to pay $9.95 per month and become a premium member, then you can stream most (not all) of the tracks available in their entirety at 96kbps WMA or download NON-portable versions in 128kbps secure WMA at no additional charge. These portable downloads can be played within nearly any Windows application that supports secure WMA (e.g., musicmatch, WMP, etc.), but they’ll become unplayable if you quit your $9.95 per month Napster Premium subscription.

    – Unfortunately, there appear to be no (portable) download discounts for existing premium members, though if you sign up now for a free trial (which’ll begin on October 29), you’ll get five free download credits.

    – You can integrate your existing MP3s and WMAs into the Napster application, but you have to do this again anytime you get new MP3s or WMAs that aren’t downloaded from Napster; it doesn’t auto-update :(.

    – You can easily share playlists, songs, and albums with friends, but they must also have the Napster software (or the WMP plugin), and I’m guessing that if they’re not a Premium subscriber, they’ll only get 30 second song previews.

    And some of my thoughts…

    – The NapsterBits on the Napster site are pretty funky and funny. Check them out!

    – The radio stations are both awesome and lame. Awesome in that you can zip forwards and backwards within songs, reorder songs, remove them from your playlist, find out more info about any playing artist, etc. But they’re lame in that they’re not nearly as numerous as many other services’ radio stations, and they repeat tracks within the same session! That’s inexcusable, IMHO.

    If there’s interest, I’m willing to share many of the other notes I’ve taken about my Napster experience so far. In particular, feel free to leave comments here with any specific questions you have about the Napster 2.0 beta.

  • A music solution to make everyone happy

    I touched upon this idea briefly in my earlier note about Musicmatch’s new download service, but I’d like to go into more detail about what I see as the solution towards universal Music Happiness.

    Without further ado, here is Adam’s (hypothetical) Online Music Service, or “AOMS” for short.

    There are three critical aspects of AOMS… Flexible Fidelity and DRM combinations, Open Architecture, and Incented Sharing.

    —

    Flexible Fidelity and DRM combinations
    First of all, while AOMS would be available in a more fancy client (special software) version for Mac, PC, and Unix systems, it’d also work more simply but just as well via standards-compliant Web browsers.

    Every music clip within AOMS would be available as both a stream AND a download in three formats:
    1) LOW FIDELITY: Available in their entirety for everyone, with no restrictions.
    2) HIGH FIDELITY – 30 second preview: No restrictions.
    3) HIGH FIDELITY – full:
    3a) Available free with Loose DRM (iTunes-style) on an unlimited basis for AOMS Premium Subscribers (who pay $20-$25 per month, or are part of a Premium Affinity Group, such as a university or ISP that’s paying a block fee to AOMS).
    3b) Available with Loose DRM for 75 cents per download to non-subscribers.
    3c) Available free in Shared (stricter) DRM format. This DRM implementation would limit song files with expiration dates and/or maximum play times (e.g., 15 days or 10 plays)

    These different fidelity and DRM levels are key to the viral success of AOMS. Now-industry-standard 30-second song samples are often insufficient foundations for purchasing decisions, whereas full-length low fidelity clips are likely to both increase awareness of and interest in new music (expanding music demand) and increase the frequency of purchases. Shared (stricter) DRM files would be the foundation of successful Incented Sharing (discussed later)

    —

    Open Architecture
    Just as Amazon.com makes its entire catalog available for free via XML feeds today, AOMS would make information on every clip available to Webmasters as well. Via automated feeds, gospel aficianados could highlight a list of tunes for their gospel Web sites, enabling their visitors to stream or download clips according to the visitors’ AOMS membership status. That is, AOMS Premium members, once authenticated, would be able to download or stream a hi-fi copy of any listed and linked gospel tune on the site straight from their browser. In contrast, those without Premium memberships would be able to either stream or download a lo-fi clip or 30-second hi-fi clip, or download a Shared DRM full-length clip.

    The beauty of the open architecture of this system is that it would empower Webmasters to extend the reach, scope, and sophistication of the AOMS catalog via creative categorizing and selection. For instance, AOMS may not have a separate specified category for female collegiate a cappella music, but an ardent fan of this sub-genre could create his or her own AOMS-based list, catering to a narrow but still-valuable demographic. Similarly, AOMS may not have detailed info on every artist, album, or track, but enthusiastic fans could and undoubtedly would author this, using the freely available AOMS clips as a springboard and reference.

    —

    Incented Sharing
    As suggested above, everyone would not only have the opportunity to be a critic and a DJ of sorts, but indeed, also a salesperson, and a profitable one at that. With 5 cents of every 75 cent sale going to the referrer of the sale, Webmasters — in a fashion similar to the Amazon.com model — would be encouraged to share and recommend music via both artistic and economic incentives.

    Of perhaps even greater interest to the Recording Industry, droves of music lovers and mercenaries alike would certainly flood the peer-to-peer services with Shared DRM tracks, knowing that they’d reap 5 cents for every time someone downloaded their copy and purchased a Loose DRM version for 75 cents. Not only would Premium subscribers be eligible to unlimitedly share their copies (which would become Shared DRM files outside the subscribers’ network of three included computers), but so, too, would those who paid 75 cents for each of their tunes.

    Not only would gobs of folks be interested in uploading full-length protected songs to Web sites and P2P services, but many Web surfers and P2P users would be equally interested in downloading them. They’d know that they’d be getting files of very high sound quality and accurate tagging, in contrast with the oft-sloppily-recorded, mislabeled, and 128-or-lower bit rate files typically available online.

    —

    For most of this article, I’ve highlighted how AOMS would serve the purposes of both the Recording Industry and general consumers. However, the value of AOMS goes far beyond that…

    A boon to lesser-known bands and musicians in general
    With free lo-fi clips and Shared DRM clips freely available to all users on all platforms, artists of all means would be able to easily facilitate and encourage the sharing of their music. With the increasing levels of broadband penetration, artists could even e-mail Shared DRM clips to opt-in subscribers or friends.

    A boon to music culture in general
    How often have enthusiasts of more ecclectic music wanted to easily share their awesome finds with others, sadly finding that the only way of doing so was to run afoul of the law? Quite often, I’d say! For instance, I paid for and downloaded the Overture from an wonderful musical, and I wanted to share it with a friend in Germany who hadn’t even heard of the musical before. Thinking that I would have the technical, if not strictly-legal authority to do so by purchasing the track with PressPlay, I was shocked and angry when my friend was unable to listen to the track. Bullied and beaten after trying to do the right thing, I simply went on KaZaA, downloaded the (unfettered) equivalent track and forwarded her this file.

    In our society… when we have a wonderful poem we want to share with a friend, we can easily scan or type it in or even read it to them. When there’s a funny or poignant picture we find, we can mail a pointer to it or even the file itself. But when we want to share the love of music — even when this passion is quite likely to lead to additional sales — we are currently unable to easily and legally do so, because we are all treated as thieves.

    This is horribly wrong. It’s wrong for musicians, it’s wrong for consumers, and it’s wrong for society. Music deserves to be Free… not as in wholly free of charge, but rather, unfettered from its existing onerous boundaries and restrictions. With greater fluidity and access, everyone will benefit.

    —

    I greatly welcome your feedback on my hypothetical service, both with regards to envisioned specifics and broader goals.

    Please take a moment to contribute to the discussion here (registration recommended but definitely not required!)

  • Musicmatch Downloads – An Early review

    I just had the pleasure of trying out Musicmatch’s new Music Download service, and though I eventually plan to more neatly organize my thoughts about this and other online music services like PressPlay and Rhapsody, I thought some folks might be interested in my ‘rough review’ and notes at this stage in the game.

    About my system that I used for trying out Musicmatch’s new service
    I have a Dell 2.4ghz Pentium system with one gb of RAM, a 200gb hard drive (with plenty of free space), a 52x CDRW drive and a CD/DVD drive, running Win XP Home SP1.

    Updating to the new Musicmatch (“MM”) 8.1 version
    I already had MM+ (paid version) version 7.5 on my site, and apparently the software had automatically downloaded the 8.0 version a while back. So when I ran the MM program this afternoon, it asked me if I wanted to update my software. I clicked on ‘yes,’ and within about 2 minutes, I had version 8.0. However, I figured I needed the most recent 8.1 version to effectively use the new download service, so I trudged over to the MM Web site to fully update my MM software. That was annoying. I then had to reboot my system, which didn’t make me any happier. But I think that this is more of a reflection on Windows’ eccentricities than any fault of MM’s.

    Registering my account with the Download service
    I already had an account with MM (for their paid radio service), but I was asked to reconfirm my billing info and retype in my credit card number and expiration date. This was straightforward and went pretty quickly; I was able to do all this from within the MM application (no separate browser windows popped up). Note that my card was NOT billed, since the MM download service charges per song downloaded (a la carte), with no monthly fees, just like iTunes.

    Searching for tunes by artist, title, etc.
    Like all the other current online music services, MM has a single search box where you type in a query, and a small pulldown menu in which you indicate “Artist, Album, or Track.” IMHO, this is ridiculously limiting. Where’s the “powersearch” option?! Why can’t I search for “Time Out” by Count Basie? How come I can’t find all Duran Duran hits from 1986? If MM and the other services want to win the loyalty of true music lovers, they shouldn’t treat us like such simple-minded folks. Defaulting to a simple search is reasonable and appropriate, but give us some more options, please!

    It’s especially frustrating when the search engine isn’t very smart. Searching for “Bobs” fails to bring up ANY songs of “The Bobs.” And in fact, when a Bobs song is saved to one’s library, it’s saved under “The…” Ack šŸ˜

    Of equal annoyance, typing in an unambiguous name for an artist, such as “Sting,” sometimes yields either multiple entries (Sting, Sting (138), and Sting (composer)) and other times results in a useless list of one item which you still must click on, instead of just bringing up the actual artist page.

    There are two redeeming aspects of MM’s search implementation. First, it does occasionally offer helpful suggestions when one’s search term is unclear or is correlating with one or more artists/titles/etc. Also, MM thoughtfully provides info — often including short bios, discographies, and so on — even for artists it has no available downloads for. Though Rhapsody is similarly sharp on this point, PressPlay, in contrast, simply pretends the artist or album doesn’t exist.

    Browsing for tunes
    Unfortunately MM doesn’t offer a very nice experience for generally browsing tunes, either. Some genres — like Soundtracks — are entirely missing. And with genre-based searching in general, MM offers a sample artist on the front page, but no real info or description on the genre. MM deserves at least some credit for offering expanded sub-genres, however. Whereas other services may have two or three classical divisions, MM offers six. However, MM doesn’t do such a great job explaining some of its sub-genres. CCM? I’m guessing Christian Contemporary Music, but who knows! In the area of informing users, Rhapsody is by far the best of all the major services.

    Also, it’s a shame that MM fails to offer any ability to browse by artist or album alphabetically :(. Sometimes one can catch the most serendipitous finds via this sort of browsing, instead of just focused searches.

    On the flip side, MM does offer some interesting browsing twists. Unique amongst all the services, MM lets you browse for songs by their recording date, so you can, for instance, see top songs from 1963, or any year between 1960 and 2002. Additionally, while outside the scope of this blog entry, MM’s radio offerings are actually quite good and one can select an entire station just of 19xx year music! I had fun selecting music from my high school graduation year, and no, I’m not going to specify what year that was šŸ˜‰

    MM does offer the ability to see top artists, tracks, and albums, but its offering here is anemic compared to PressPlay’s detailed Billboard chart features, which let users check out the most popular songs and artists by specific genre according to Billboard.

    The overall user interface
    It’s not bad. Most artist, track, and album names are hyperlinked (although unwisely not underlined), letting you get more details quickly. Sort order is typically editable with just a click, and that’s nice. The entire app is pleasantly resizeable, as are its individual parts. And when the app is minimized, you can still see any the track and album name of any track playing specified in the taskbar, and my MS keyboard’s Next and Previous track buttons work (unlike with PressPlay). Unfortunately, drag-and-drop functionality is quite limited; for instance, I tried to drag the listing of a song currently playing to my Favorites section, and nothing happened. That’s a shame. In fact, I could find no easy and consistent way to bookmark my favorite artists, albums, or tunes šŸ™

    Library integration
    This is a key selling point of MM, and one way in which it vaults FAR ahead of all the other online music services. When you download a track, it is immediately integrated into your MM library, complete with name, track time, and all other relevant info. You can drag and drop a combination of your previously-existing MP3s along with your new MM Download tracks to the MM burner and burn a CD seamlessly (more on that later). You don’t realize how valuable this integration is until you experience it firsthand.

    Track listings
    This is a bit frustrating. First of all, sometimes the track listings include the track running times, sometimes they don’t. Also, there are separate listings for downloadable tracks and each artist’s discography. It would have been much nicer to simply have these two integrated, so you could check out an artist’s discography, noting which tracks had download symbols next to them. Also, MM’s notation of “Popular” tracks is a bit confusing. What is the measurement here? Popularity offline? Popularity amongst MM users? And if the latter, based upon sampling or downloads or…?

    Sampling music
    MM offers the now-industry-standard 30 second song samples, and at 64kbps WMA. The sound quality is extremely good, but the buffering takes longer than I’d like… typically 4-5 seconds even on my hefty system with broadband. I know that Microsoft brags that WMP9 (Windows Media Player 9) offers instantaneous playback with no buffering, so I’m wondering why that’s not implemented here.

    Music pricing
    All individual tracks that I saw were 99 cents, and though 99% of the albums were priced at $9.99, I did see a couple priced at $11.99. Overall, though, I was impressed that even larger albums (like “Urinetown,” at 18 tracks) were still typically priced at $9.99.

    Downloading tunes
    This is where MM truly shines… and provides an experience worthy of iTunes comparison. After registering once, downloading either an individual track or an album requires a mere two clicks: Buy, then Confirm. The track is added to your download queue and starts downloading immediately if there are no other tracks being already downloaded. Once it’s downloaded, it starts playing, and it’s added to your library. Easy and hassle-free! Better yet, the sound quality of the downloaded tracks is simply divine; 160 VBR (variable bitrate) WMA (Windows Media Audio). This consistent high-end quality is better than any other download service I’ve ever experienced, legal or otherwise (most MP3s on KaZaA are 128).

    DRM (Digital Rights Management)
    The DRM isn’t terribly onerous, though I’d certainly like to see the labels wise up and loosen DRM dramatically or even entirely (yes, I’m serious). But that’s fodder for another entry ;-). Anyway, the MM DRM is at least consistent (unlike the horrid BuyMusic service), allowing you to listen to any downloaded track on up to three computers, and burn it to a CD an unlimited number of times (albeit only 10 times in any single playlist set). Sending downloads to secure portable devices is also supported, though it’s important to note that not all portable music players support the secure WMA format yet.

    Regrettably, however, the “three computers” allowance is a bit misleading. As a test, I took a song I downloaded with MM and copied it to a friend’s computer. I was unable to play it unless I installed MM (even though the track is in Windows Media format and should be playable by WMP). And I’m guessing that even if I had downloaded and installed MM, the track still wouldn’t have played unless I registered the copy of MM on that computer in my name. That’s not very helpful if, say, a college student wants to listen to a track on his college computer and at his parents’ house over Christmas break. Frankly, I think “three computers” should mean any three computers, but, yeah, the recording industry still has a Stupid Stick up their posterior. One day they’ll learn that sharing can lead to smart viral marketing; for instance, allowing any user to share any legal download with an unlimited number of friends, who can then play that track ten times over thirty days for free, and unlock it for 99 cents. Free publicity from passionate music listeners. But no, the recording industry prefers to still use dumbly-crippling DRM, preventing enthusiastic souls from sharing ANYTHING with other people. Idiots . But okay, okay, I digress again, sorry šŸ˜‰

    Burning downloaded tracks to CD
    I have to admit that this was a bit problematic for me. Even after three separate burning attempts (including once after a full reboot), I had repeatedly mixed results each time as follows:
    – Playing the CD back on my CD burner results in the first ten seconds of the track being horribly garbled, and the rest of the song being fine.
    – The CD sounds flawless in my computer’s DVD player
    – When popping the CD in my roommate’s CD-boombox, the first half-second of the song is cut off, but the rest sounds perfect.

    This is using relatively new 700mb hi-speed Sony CDRs and my 52x burner set to 4x via MM. In fact, one can ONLY burn MM tracks on MM, not on Nero or Windows Media Player as I found out, to my frustration. But I guess that’s not really so much of a problem, since you have to have the MM player anyway to even use the service, so it makes sense to burn tracks in the integrated player.

    Unsurprisingly (but to the recording industry, perhaps ominously), I was easily able to insert the newly burned CD and rip a high quality MP3 or WMA file off of it… with the new file being completely DRM-free. In other words, if I wanted to be a twit, I could simply pay for and download an entire album off of MM and burn it to CD, then rip it and upload the unrestricted (but nicely labeled) tracks to KaZaA. This is why, briefly touching back upon one of my earlier arguments, that it’d make a lot more sense for MM and the recording industry to support much more friendly DRM implementations at the get-go, allowing people to share downloaded tracks with friends or even posting them to p2p services… with those tracks simply timing out after a while. Actually, I am definitely going to expand upon this in a later entry šŸ™‚

    Availability of music
    With regards to the scope of popular music, I’ve found MM to be about on par with Rhapsody and PressPlay, though each has its own significant gaps. Unfortunately, it appears as though MM currently offers ZERO classical downloads, since searches on popular classical artists like Bach, Telemann, and Monteverdi turned up no actual downloadable tracks :-(. Adding insult to injury, on lists featuring the various composers, MM suggests that it has dozens of downloads available, and it’s only after you click on a composer name that you realize it’s all a mirage, at least classically speaking. [NOTE: See 10/10/03 edit at the bottom of this note]

    For folks who aren’t primarily classical aficianados, though, MM certainly offers quite enough tunes to fill up a lot of iPods, and it IS indeed fun checking out the depth and breadth of available artists and songs.

    Ay caramba!
    Though only available in the U.S. right now (due to licensing restrictions), polyglots and similarly cultured souls will be displeased to see MM’s butchering of foreign language characters, such as the ? in se?orita. MM omits the special diacritical marks in some cases, or substitutes weird-looking characters or character combinations in other cases.

    In summary
    Despite some frustrating restrictions (imposed by the recording industry) and occasional UI flakiness, Musicmatch shines where it really counts: enabling the masses to download tunes from a large library quickly and affordably. Since the software is free and registering an account is also free and pretty painless, I highly recommend that every PC user (at least those with broadband) give MM a try.

    Useful and interesting URLs
    – Musicmatch: http://www.musicmatch.com/
    – * This entry: http://www.bladam.com/archives/0309292010.htm
    – MM Discussion (no registration required): http://www.smilezone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=319
    – The ideal music service – http://www.bladam.com/archives/0309300101.htm
    – RIAA Amnesty — A Parody: http://www.riaaAmnesty.com/
    – My earlier brief look at Listen.com’s Rhapsody: http://www.bladam.com/archives/0302141717.htm
    – My rant about the horrid buymusic.com service: http://www.bladam.com/archives/0307251009.htm

    —

    * Please do share this article with friends, but kindly offer the URL above (http://www.bladam.com/archives/0309292010.htm) rather than cutting and pasting large sections of my commentary. I want to make sure that any corrections or other updates I add here are not missed by those interested in this area! Thanks for your consideration :-).

    —

    EDITED TO ADD:

    10/10/03 – Mick Orlowski noted in the Conversation Corner the following:

    Just a note on Classical in MM… Musicmatch has a very powerful Classical component of the streaming “MX” service. If you were seing track totals after composer names, it is likely you were seeing how many works were available in their Artist on Demand feature. No you can’t download Bach… but you can listen to a Bach-only CD-quality station on demand… or create a station that plays only your 5 favorite composers. MM definitely does not ignore classical… it’s just not downloadable yet.

    Thanks for the info, Mick!

  • Party like it’s 1999

    Last night, I had the pleasure of attending the Google Dance 2003, and experienced wonderous but surreal feelings of deja vu.

    Disclaimer: I have friends who work at Google, and I have interviewed for jobs there in the past.

    —

    Before I describe the Google event, let me fill you in on the weird and wacky events we San Francisco / Silicon Valley peeps were privy to during the heady dot.com days, BC (Before the Crash).

    On any given week, there were at least several parties with open bars, free food, lots of dancing, plus large numbers of ambitious, optimistic, and attractive people.

    Back then, companies justified the expenditure in several ways:

    1) They were gaining branding and awareness.

    2) During the days when talented techies were in huge demand but limited supply, it was cheaper to throw big attractive “look at our company!” bashes than pay recruiters to shop for talent. Recruiter fees for 15 techies: Easily $300,000. A huge party for the techies and their friends and their friends of friends? Probably a mere quarter mil… a $50K discount, and a hell of a lot more fun than hiring head hunters.

    3) The dot.commers needed to release some steam after working extended long hours.

    —

    Fast forward to the Google Dance last night.

    There were open bars, free food, lots of dancing (duh!), and a huge collection of ambitious, optimistic, and attractive people.

    Sound familiar? But unlike the days in which such parties literally overlapped each other, this contemporary Google Dance was a freaky anomaly, and I don’t believe it can be “justified” in the same ways as parties of dot.gone. No, it seemed pretty clear that Google threw a massive party to entertain its own employees and simply offer up some good will for everyone else.

    I suppose this shouldn’t have surprised me. While the rest of the technology sector still seems to be doing more firing than hiring, Google is hiring across nearly all its departments with a vengeance. And Google layoffs or drastic belt-tightening? I haven’t ever heard of any of that, have you?

    Perhaps this is because Google started off admirably and sensibly frugal (now Froogle) from the beginning. No Aeron chairs. No BMWs for newly hired engineers. No $30,000 signing bonuses. Though admittedly they do have a handful of Segway scooters on the premises šŸ˜€

    Instead, Google generally offers its employees generous albeit not outrageous benefits, and provides a place where folks are encouraged to innovate in a flexible environment. And the corporate culture is fun without being frivolous, it seems. I just learned that every AdWords staffer, for instance, was recently treated to a local Dave Matthews concert.

    —

    But returning to last night… one of the most noteworthy things that struck me was the sense of joy and exuberance, and not of the irrational sort, either, IMHO. There appeared to be a sort of Joie de vivre amongst the Google staffers that suggests contentment and a sense of security rather than the much less attractive insecure aggressiveness exhibited by more swaggering companies and their employees. The many Googlers I chatted with last night were proud without being arrogant or dismissive; they were friendly, respectful, and clearly happy with their employment.

    With the party that they threw, it’s no wonder.

    In addition to all the stuff I mentioned earlier, the party featured foosball and ping-pong tables, lots of colorful bouncy-balls and lava lamps (Google fixtures), a humungous video screen featuring live feeds from the dance floor as well as live feeds highlighting current Google searches, plus random pulsating graphics. I also got a cool Google t-shirt, the chance to chat one-on-one with a Google engineer about my Web sites, and a $300 AdWords credit!

    I definitely went home with a big smile on my face, and I understand even more than before why Google may currently be the Happiest Place On Earth.

    —

    UPDATE – 8/21/03: Pictures are now available at http://www.google.com/googledance2003/

  • Where do kids fit on the Internet?

    Earlier today, I got an Instant Message out of the blue… from someone who had visited my SmileZone site and noticed the IM address on my contact page.

    After brief introductions, I learned that she’s nine years old! And surprisingly articulate for such a young kid, too.

    She was looking to make friends and have a chat but I, alas, didn’t have much time for bantering this afternoon… and at 32, I felt a bit awkward chatting with a nine-year-old anyway.

    As politely as I could, I wished her a good day and good luck… but I wasn’t prepared for what came next.

    “So where can I find people, then? To chat with… make some friends” she asked.

    I drew a blank.

    The few online chats I’ve seen tend to be a bit more, ahem, risque than I’d ever want to recommend for a young kid.

    And for that matter, I don’t think Web sites in the U.S. can even legally collect contact info from under-14-year-olds, and hence I can’t imagine there being any pen pal-type sites out there for this girl.

    So, aside from just impersonally browsing for information, what does the Internet hold for young kids?

    With so many of us adults enjoying the personal aspects of the Internet… networking, sharing ideas, making friends… I’m guessing most of us (at least those of us without kids) never stopped to think about how limited young people are.

    I know when I was a young teen and likely even earlier, I didn’t have many friends in school. I was too smart… and my social skills hadn’t kept pace with my intellect. Back then, there was no grand Internet to connect with, well, nerds like me for commiseration and learning and befriending.

    Of course, the Internet today is filled with people of all interests and ages. But where can the kids go? Our American society has been so paranoid about walling them AWAY from any possible scandalous or controversial tidbit (oh no, a breast… oh no, a bad word!) that I don’t think we’ve given much thought to creating places where kids can interact thoughtfully and more-or-less freely.

    Perhaps I’m wrong, however, and I’d be delighted to be pointed in the right direction for kid-friendly resources on the Internet.

    Do you know of any good sites for young kids?

    And what do you think about this situation in general?

  • Those who can’t find history are doomed to get annoyed

    Some things in life are just amazingly simple, obvious, and intuitive.

    Practically all books nowadays have page numbering; to get to the next page, you simply flip a piece of paper, and voila, you continue reading.

    Newspapers can be a bit more complicated, but they at least offer straightfoward information: “Continued on page A17.” Sure enough, your fingers trudge you to page A17, and you can finish where you left off. Even most news sites on the Web have a simple “Next page” link at the bottom of each multi-page story.

    So why are blogs — theoretically the next step in communications evolution — so amazingly backwards when it comes to basic navigation?

    You’ll notice that my blog has page numbering (along with “next” and “previous” links), but I had to manually add this in myself (using a “plugin”)… and I’m betting my blog is among a measly 5% or so in blogland with this mindnumbingly obvious form of navigation.

    I mean, come on, blog software developers, this isn’t rocket science!

    People start reading a blog, continue down the page, and it’s not a huge leap of faith to assume that they may want to continue reading more of the blog.

    But what are their options with the typical blog? Scroll through the oft insanely long right side panel until they find an archives list with links by week or month… click on such a link… and then realize that, hey, the last entry they read was August 6th, but clicking on the August Archives link forces them to scroll through all the stuff they already read. Many, I’d assume, simply give up in frustration. Or, even before that, they decide that if they missed a blogger’s earlier entries, it’s simply not worth the hassle to go back and find them.

    Is it really asking that much of the blog software developers to offer a wonderfully basic “read more entries” link that’ll take readers to the next page of entries?

    Are there any common-sense usability folks in the house? At all? Or is the blogging community just content to serve up ephemereal helpings of the ‘latest great thing’?

  • How (not) to impress a woman

    Last night while out dancing I had the pleasure of meeting a particularly interesting, talented, and attractive woman. After a lengthy chat, I got up the guts to invite her out for an evening next week, and then proceeded to search through my geeky but serviceable bookbag for a pen.

    Finding only a mishmash of non-pen-type things (along with, admittedly, one pen’ish but broken thing), I was about ready to take drastic measures when this woman noticed my Handspring Treo Palm phone.

    “That’s a Palm Pilot, isn’t it?” she asked.

    “Er, no,” I dumbly argued, “It’s actually a Handspring Treo phone but…”

    “It has an addressbook, right?” she continued.

    “Sure, yeah” I blathered sans clue, “and a Web browser, too, and…”

    “Okay, so can’t you can put my info in there?”

    It’s so embarrassing when I’ve got all that geekiness without the more-useful geek-SMARTS to go along with it!

  • Holy popularity, Batman!

    I just checked my access logs, and learned something both cool and strange. I’m suddenly popular.

    Oh wait a minute. My BLOG is popular. That’s not necessarily the same thing. Then again, nowadays, isn’t the line a bit blurred amongst us geeks?

    From what I can tell at this point, what prodded over 50 people in one day to bookmark my site was my “BuyMusic.com” parody. Summon a smidgen of indignation, throw in an ounce of creativity, mix in a laughably beginner-talent with PaintShopPro, and voila — Instant parody logo… instant fame and acclaim.

    I received virtual applause from Mexico, Finland, Singapore, England, Sweden, Switzerland, Belgium, Germany, Denmark, France, and yes, of course, the good ol’ U.S. of A. (and for the record, I do not use cookies to track individual movements; all of this info was gleaned just from domain names in my log).

    Okay, okay, enough basking in the glory. But what does it all mean?

    Well, for starters, it seems snarkiness is more well-received than smileyness. People (okay, even smiley folks like yours truly) apparently love seeing an ‘evil’ company get kicked, and if it’s an RIAA-affiliated company, so much the better.

    —

    Have I started a quasi-meme? Will BuyMusic.com’s lawyers come after me? (And yes, I’m frankly salivating at figuratively kicking their legal team in the nuts :D)

    And in the end, isn’t it all a bit pathetic anyway? “While there may be several million blogs eating up bandwidth, Jupiter estimates that only 4 percent of the online community read them.”

    Ahem. I’m ready for my close-up, Mr. DeMille!