Why Amazon, Not iTunes, is the Future of Digital Music

by Joe Brockmeier - Mar. 10, 2008Comments (8)

Amazon turned quite a few heads when it announced that it would be entering the music download business by selling MP3s unencumbered by Digital Rights Management (DRM). Now Amazon is raising the stakes even further by offering its download client for Linux, in addition to the existing Mac OS X and Windows clients.

By dint of its openness and multiple platform support, users should really be looking to Amazon -- rather than Apple -- for their digital music needs.

As of last week, Amazon has packaged the MP3 Downloader for several distros, including openSUSE, Fedora, Debian, and Ubuntu. I've verified that the openSUSE client works just fine -- I did a quick test last night, installed the client on my openSUSE 10.3 laptop and bought the latest Nine Inch Nails album(s), Ghosts I-IV.

So why is Amazon's solution head and shoulders above Apple's iTunes or other digital music stores? It's certainly not for cosmetic reasons -- Apple's iTunes provides a much more attractive interface and is a bit more intuitive than the "search on the Web, download through a helper application" model that Amazon is using. Because Amazon isn't controlling the whole stack, it can't provide quite the same kind of convenience that you'll get with iTunes, but it also doesn't provide the same kind of lockdown, so it's a net positive.

Despite its less-than-gorgeous interface, Amazon has my vote for a couple of reasons:

First, Amazon is operating system agnostic. While Apple wants to tie users to Mac OS X (you can use iTunes on Windows too), or at least to the iPod line of media players, Amazon is offering its goods with a universally supported format that's usable by just about anyone with a computer. Want to use an iPod? No problem. Want to use a $30 bargain basement MP3 player? Again, no problem. Try that with iTunes...

Second, all of Amazon's music offerings are DRM-free. This is critically important -- how else can you count on being able to play your music next year, or the year after that, or five years down the road? Other players have been known to move to DRM formats that aren't even compatible with their own legacy products.

Third, it's worth noting that Amazon's offerings are priced slightly less than Apple's (though that's not something you can count on long-term) and you get 256K MP3s for everything, not 128K.

Fourth, Amazon does have a decent selection of artists. Not perfect, a few gaps here and there. For example, Def Leppard isn't on the MP3 Download store, but everything else I tried to find -- from Leonard Cohen, to the Cure, was available.

As a die-hard Linux user, of course I'm happy that Amazon is supporting Linux. But Windows and Mac OS X users should be heartened by this as well. Why? Because it shows that Amazon is willing to support all of the platforms its customers are using -- not just the OS with the most customers. Users of other operating systems can use Amazon's music service without locking themselves into their current platform.

Choosing iTunes now means choosing a platform that's iTunes-compatible in the future, or losing the ability to easily manage your music going forward. While Apple offers some music that's not DRM-encumbered, it's not the entire catalog. Plus, Apple's music format isn't as universally supported as MP3, regardless of whether it's DRMed or not.

Even though many people have gone digital, I've resisted moving away from CDs because of the hassles inherent to using online music stores. Amazon may have finally convinced me to give up the discs and give up physical media entirely.

After several years of experience with DRM, and the annoyances that it adds, I think a lot of music enthusiasts are ready to switch to a provider that's platform neutral and compatible with any music player on the market.

Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier works for Novell as the openSUSE Community Manager.


Browse Blog

D J uses OStatic to support Open Source, ask and answer questions and stay informed. What about you?



8 Comments
 

Joe - great post - we've come to expect great things from Amazon, as far as technology goes, along with average interfaces ;) (e.g. their Kindle reader just looks like an old school commadore and their s3 could've so easily included a simple interface for backups).


How does their player stack up against, say, Songbird on Linux? And, do you see the non-DRM files being something that will be as widely embraced as iTunes songs, or will a streaming offering be something the record industry will be happier with? Of course, reading the minds of the record industry executives is like x-raying a lead box...


0 Votes

Are the movies coming drm free too? Nice! The big thing guys like Joost have been pitching has been protected content for content owners.


0 Votes

"Apple's iTunes provides a much more attractive interface and is a bit more intuitive than the "search on the Web, download through a helper application" model that Amazon is using"


You said. Until my non-technical wife can use it as easily as she uses iTunes ... we'll stick to iPods and iTunes.


0 Votes

Ummm.... iTunes on Windows. iTunes on Mac.


Doesn't seem Apple "wants to tie users to Mac OS X" afterall.


0 Votes

The most important point is the fact that Amazon sells the tracks DRM free. That is huge and will be the biggest pull for consumers who want to use that track across multiple devices and also preserve it for the future. Bezos might have missed the boat early on but he's definitely got it right when he finally took the plunge!!


0 Votes

You could have mentioned that Apple is offering non-DRM files and has stated that it wants to move it's whole business model in that direction.


0 Votes

"You could have mentioned that Apple is offering non-DRM files"


Actually, I did: "While Apple offers some music that's not DRM-encumbered, it's not the entire catalog. Plus, Apple's music format isn't as universally supported as MP3, regardless of whether it's DRMed or not."


Thanks.


0 Votes

How about mentioning "why" Apple is using DRM on most of the catalog. Mostly because the RIAA forces them to or they wouldn't be able to put any music on the site and the iTunes store wouldn't be #2 in music sales period.


Now, one could question why the independent songs/artists are DRM'd, but I have to wonder if it wasn't by the request of the artists.


Sure, DRM'ing the tracks makes people who want to buy songs on iTunes use iPods, and that is probably a big reason why Apple put "their own" DRM on the tracks in the first place. It's not Microsoft forcing Netscape Navigator off computers being sold with Windows back in the day.


However, now that Apple has that dominant market share, I really think it's not Apple that is keeping DRM on the music they sell.


0 Votes
Share Your Comments

If you are a member, to have your comment attributed to you. If you are not yet a member, Join OStatic and help the Open Source community by sharing your thoughts, answering user questions and providing reviews and alternatives for projects.