The New Napster Preview
January 2, 2002 5:32 PM Subscribe
The New Napster Preview is up. Will you pay for this? I won't.
i can't imagine many people would, i would say people that don't know much about computers may, but then do people that don't know much about computers want to trade mp3s so much? it seems so weird that people would waste money on this business strategy
posted by rhyax at 5:57 PM on January 2, 2002
posted by rhyax at 5:57 PM on January 2, 2002
If this new fee-based Napster was ad-free and gave all proceeds directly to the artists, I would subscribe. I trust the Napster brand much more than I trust the record labels. However, the record labels will continue to control the music that we listen to, and will continue to make billions of dollars off somebody else's creativity, so as long as they have their collective hands in Napster's pants, I will not subscribe.
Plus, if I'm going to be assaulted by ads in a software program, it had better be free.
posted by iracane at 6:05 PM on January 2, 2002
Plus, if I'm going to be assaulted by ads in a software program, it had better be free.
posted by iracane at 6:05 PM on January 2, 2002
Aha! More dumbing down of an interface for the mainstream. It has a "sleek new look." Huh?
posted by nakedjon at 6:14 PM on January 2, 2002
posted by nakedjon at 6:14 PM on January 2, 2002
More dumbing down of an interface for the mainstream
This is one of those products that could easily be command line. I don't like how people automatically dismiss command line in favor of GUI.
c:\>search *mozart*40*
searching... finished displaying top ten
1. Mozart Symphony 40 192 kbps 14.2 megs T1
Then all you would have to do is type which number to download. No multitabs with all this extra internet explorer stuff! sigh.... sorry for the hijack.
posted by geoff. at 6:43 PM on January 2, 2002
This is one of those products that could easily be command line. I don't like how people automatically dismiss command line in favor of GUI.
c:\>search *mozart*40*
searching... finished displaying top ten
1. Mozart Symphony 40 192 kbps 14.2 megs T1
Then all you would have to do is type which number to download. No multitabs with all this extra internet explorer stuff! sigh.... sorry for the hijack.
posted by geoff. at 6:43 PM on January 2, 2002
From Napster's FAQ:
Why should I pay when I can get it for free somewhere else?
You mean aside from the fact that Napster is the coolest?
hahahahaha .... Yes. That's right. We want coolness over free. They really know their market, don't they!
Seriously, we know that there will always be a lot of alternatives. Ultimately, the choice will be yours, but we feel that file sharing communities that pay copyright holders and provide simple, useful tools to help you do what you want with your digital music collection are going to prevail. We feel strongly that the value you receive from Napster will make the fee seem insignificant.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahhahahahahahahaahhahahaahahhahahahaahhaahhahahahahahaha
posted by Rastafari at 7:03 PM on January 2, 2002
Why should I pay when I can get it for free somewhere else?
You mean aside from the fact that Napster is the coolest?
hahahahaha .... Yes. That's right. We want coolness over free. They really know their market, don't they!
Seriously, we know that there will always be a lot of alternatives. Ultimately, the choice will be yours, but we feel that file sharing communities that pay copyright holders and provide simple, useful tools to help you do what you want with your digital music collection are going to prevail. We feel strongly that the value you receive from Napster will make the fee seem insignificant.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahhahahahahahahaahhahahaahahhahahahaahhaahhahahahahahaha
posted by Rastafari at 7:03 PM on January 2, 2002
my first lover was the command line, and damn it, she still puts out, why's all these business suit cats gotta disrespect her? eh?
the eh? gives it character, and the misspellings say "style"
posted by fuq at 7:05 PM on January 2, 2002
the eh? gives it character, and the misspellings say "style"
posted by fuq at 7:05 PM on January 2, 2002
No one will ever play for music that imprisons you at your computer, which is what I assume the "no portable players" format entails. Sitting at your computer and listening to the music coming out of it is, for reasons I can't define, among the world's least lively experiences.
posted by argybarg at 7:43 PM on January 2, 2002
posted by argybarg at 7:43 PM on January 2, 2002
Sitting at your computer and listening to the music coming out of it is, for reasons I can't define, among the world's least lively experiences.
Unless you're at work.
Limewire, using the Gnutella network, works just fine for me. No ads, no fees.
I used Napster before its heyday because it was easier than trying to use a Gnutella client on a dialup connection. We've been predicting the stillbirth of Napster's second incarnation since July when the old service died. It will be interesting to see how this fares. I'm also interested in seeing some hard numbers on who is buying into Pressplay for their [legal sucky bastardized] downloads.
posted by schlaager at 7:52 PM on January 2, 2002
Unless you're at work.
Limewire, using the Gnutella network, works just fine for me. No ads, no fees.
I used Napster before its heyday because it was easier than trying to use a Gnutella client on a dialup connection. We've been predicting the stillbirth of Napster's second incarnation since July when the old service died. It will be interesting to see how this fares. I'm also interested in seeing some hard numbers on who is buying into Pressplay for their [legal sucky bastardized] downloads.
posted by schlaager at 7:52 PM on January 2, 2002
If I could consistently connect and download the music I wanted, with less fuss than kazaa or audiogalaxy, and it reimbursed artists, I would gladly pay for that, for essentially network/service reliability.
posted by mathowie at 7:55 PM on January 2, 2002
posted by mathowie at 7:55 PM on January 2, 2002
I don't like how people automatically dismiss command line in favor of GUI.
c:\>search *mozart*40*
One reason is that most people prefer to click a search button (or just hit return) rather than type "search" every time they want to do a search. Command line is efficient if you love to type, but most people probably don't.
I think the best of both worlds is GUIs that have slick keyboard shortcuts for every function. That way I can hit alt-s if I don't want to take my hands of the keyboard. In my opinion, that's better than command line and pure mouse-driven GUI.
posted by hitsman at 8:14 PM on January 2, 2002
c:\>search *mozart*40*
One reason is that most people prefer to click a search button (or just hit return) rather than type "search" every time they want to do a search. Command line is efficient if you love to type, but most people probably don't.
I think the best of both worlds is GUIs that have slick keyboard shortcuts for every function. That way I can hit alt-s if I don't want to take my hands of the keyboard. In my opinion, that's better than command line and pure mouse-driven GUI.
posted by hitsman at 8:14 PM on January 2, 2002
c:\>search *mozart*40*
Another reason is that people don't want to learn idiosyncracies of command line syntax. Now was it
c:\>search *mozart*40*
or
c:\>find mozart, 40
or
c:\>list "mozart" 40
It's more efficient to not have to think and just click the [search/find/go] button right next to the HTML form box that looks like every other search box you've used around the web.
posted by hitsman at 8:17 PM on January 2, 2002
Another reason is that people don't want to learn idiosyncracies of command line syntax. Now was it
c:\>search *mozart*40*
or
c:\>find mozart, 40
or
c:\>list "mozart" 40
It's more efficient to not have to think and just click the [search/find/go] button right next to the HTML form box that looks like every other search box you've used around the web.
posted by hitsman at 8:17 PM on January 2, 2002
Limewire and Grokster users may want to read this: File-sharing programs carry Trojan horse.
posted by DakotaPaul at 8:19 PM on January 2, 2002
posted by DakotaPaul at 8:19 PM on January 2, 2002
We feel strongly that the value you receive from Napster will make the fee seem insignificant.
What matt said. If you actually received something different from Napster--like guaranteed connections or error free files--it might be worth it. Who wants to sit up all night trying dozens of times to find a complete version of a single file? If they dumped the peer-to-peer model, and you could download the files from Napsters servers, it might be worthwhile.
posted by jpoulos at 8:20 PM on January 2, 2002
What matt said. If you actually received something different from Napster--like guaranteed connections or error free files--it might be worth it. Who wants to sit up all night trying dozens of times to find a complete version of a single file? If they dumped the peer-to-peer model, and you could download the files from Napsters servers, it might be worthwhile.
posted by jpoulos at 8:20 PM on January 2, 2002
I'm with Matt and jpoulos.
I've been frustrated more than once by incomplete files, or songs that weren't quite right. Depending on the price and what I get for that price, I would be happy to pay for the service.
That said, I'll stick with audiogalaxy for now. I've also discovered thru kindall's site an interesting way to find mp3's.
posted by ashbury at 8:35 PM on January 2, 2002
I've been frustrated more than once by incomplete files, or songs that weren't quite right. Depending on the price and what I get for that price, I would be happy to pay for the service.
That said, I'll stick with audiogalaxy for now. I've also discovered thru kindall's site an interesting way to find mp3's.
posted by ashbury at 8:35 PM on January 2, 2002
The New Napster is The Royal Tenenbaums of file sharing...
posted by BentPenguin at 8:53 PM on January 2, 2002
posted by BentPenguin at 8:53 PM on January 2, 2002
The revolutionary idea of the new Napster is that it combines all the worst elements of existing music services, and then goes one further by wrapping it all in a proprietary music format.
The only application I see for the new Napster is as background music when you are working on the computer. As far as I'm concerned, that's an already solved problem.
posted by chipr at 8:58 PM on January 2, 2002
The only application I see for the new Napster is as background music when you are working on the computer. As far as I'm concerned, that's an already solved problem.
posted by chipr at 8:58 PM on January 2, 2002
I'm not a big fan of major record labels, nor most of the artists on them. But if I can find a service that I can subscribe to that helps indie artists out I'll subscribe. Right now I use emusic.com for that. I think we forget that a lot of bands pour everything they have creatively and financially into their music. If someone has taken the time to create something for your enjoyment shouldn't they be deserving of something?
posted by mantaray at 9:32 PM on January 2, 2002
posted by mantaray at 9:32 PM on January 2, 2002
Limewire and Grokster users may want to read this: File-sharing programs carry Trojan horse.. did you really suspect any less?
"It was not what we thought this was, said Greg Bildson, Limewire's chief technical officer. It was supposed to be a promotional tool...not blatant spyware. yeah. right. you mean you got caught. i'm overly suspicious, although grokster offers a removal tool and further states: "We were never informed that it[the advertiser's code] installed or was a trojan.
mhmmmm
posted by sixtwenty3dc at 9:56 PM on January 2, 2002
"It was not what we thought this was, said Greg Bildson, Limewire's chief technical officer. It was supposed to be a promotional tool...not blatant spyware. yeah. right. you mean you got caught. i'm overly suspicious, although grokster offers a removal tool and further states: "We were never informed that it[the advertiser's code] installed or was a trojan.
mhmmmm
posted by sixtwenty3dc at 9:56 PM on January 2, 2002
I've also discovered thru kindall's site...
How 'bout a link to the actual source next time?
posted by KLAX at 9:59 PM on January 2, 2002
How 'bout a link to the actual source next time?
posted by KLAX at 9:59 PM on January 2, 2002
Well, my link was to this Davezilla post but he got it elsewhere (couldn't find it on that site, though, hence the link to Dave).
posted by kindall at 10:08 PM on January 2, 2002
posted by kindall at 10:08 PM on January 2, 2002
{derail}
KLAX-notice I said "thru", not "at", . Kindall very clearly marked his source, which I assumed people would spot. This is a silly thing to mention, and discussed many times.
{/derail}
posted by ashbury at 11:19 PM on January 2, 2002
KLAX-notice I said "thru", not "at", . Kindall very clearly marked his source, which I assumed people would spot. This is a silly thing to mention, and discussed many times.
{/derail}
posted by ashbury at 11:19 PM on January 2, 2002
I haven't really looked into this yet, but I guess I would pay for it sometime in the future if enough people report good things about it. The luxury would be getting tracks that are recorded at the same bit rate, have the same standards, volume, and so on.
Oh, yeah, and those users who share their download files folder, so you only get a % of the track you are trying to download. It would be good to not have that happen.
For the time being though, I'm staying with WinMX
posted by lucien at 3:20 AM on January 3, 2002
Oh, yeah, and those users who share their download files folder, so you only get a % of the track you are trying to download. It would be good to not have that happen.
For the time being though, I'm staying with WinMX
posted by lucien at 3:20 AM on January 3, 2002
I tried a few of these things back when they were hot, but now I prefer the newsgroups for free music. You can't find everything at once but browsing the week to week variety and being able to request an obscure item (successful every time so far) fits me better.
(And the poor encode quality of the sharer stuff in the early days turned me off...is it better these days?)
posted by HTuttle at 7:03 AM on January 3, 2002
(And the poor encode quality of the sharer stuff in the early days turned me off...is it better these days?)
posted by HTuttle at 7:03 AM on January 3, 2002
Will I be able to use my old user name with the new Napster?
No. We've decided to start over and give everyone a shot at getting the user name they've always dreamed of having.
i can't imagine anyone was that stifled by not getting their first choice napster user name.
posted by jerseygirl at 7:49 AM on January 3, 2002
No. We've decided to start over and give everyone a shot at getting the user name they've always dreamed of having.
i can't imagine anyone was that stifled by not getting their first choice napster user name.
posted by jerseygirl at 7:49 AM on January 3, 2002
<call out>
KLAX: I've noticed that you're quick to criticize around here, but you never seem to actually contribute anything to a discussion. Why don't you keep your mouth shut until you have something useful to say?
</call out>
posted by jpoulos at 8:05 AM on January 3, 2002
KLAX: I've noticed that you're quick to criticize around here, but you never seem to actually contribute anything to a discussion. Why don't you keep your mouth shut until you have something useful to say?
</call out>
posted by jpoulos at 8:05 AM on January 3, 2002
FIGHT! FIGHT! In the lunchroom at noon! FIGHT!
See: Other thread
posted by HTuttle at 8:11 AM on January 3, 2002
See: Other thread
posted by HTuttle at 8:11 AM on January 3, 2002
I'm sorry if that derailed the thread. I couldn't help it. Please, continue talking about Napster. If KLAX has something to say, he/she knows where to find me.
posted by jpoulos at 8:15 AM on January 3, 2002
posted by jpoulos at 8:15 AM on January 3, 2002
The design and information architecture of their new offering is horrendous. It looks like the old site's version 0.2. Doesn't Napster know that cool, minimal, useful aesthetics were a key part of their service? AudioGalaxy will win.
posted by boardman at 8:49 AM on January 3, 2002
posted by boardman at 8:49 AM on January 3, 2002
KLAX: [Y]ou never seem to actually contribute anything to a discussion.
Try this then.
As to your suggestion -- the minute I find I way to work a benefic nugget like That's the most arrogant, condescending load of bullshit I've ever read on MetaFilter into a thread, you'll be the first to know.
posted by KLAX at 9:40 AM on January 3, 2002
Try this then.
As to your suggestion -- the minute I find I way to work a benefic nugget like That's the most arrogant, condescending load of bullshit I've ever read on MetaFilter into a thread, you'll be the first to know.
posted by KLAX at 9:40 AM on January 3, 2002
KLAX--you seem to have a hard time getting along with the other kids. Why don't you try contributing instead of being a dick? I'm sure that when you have valid points to make, you're very interesting.
Until you have something valid to say about this thread, be quiet or take it to MetaTalk.
posted by ashbury at 1:01 PM on January 3, 2002
Until you have something valid to say about this thread, be quiet or take it to MetaTalk.
posted by ashbury at 1:01 PM on January 3, 2002
« Older As if it didn't have everything else going against... | Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
DOA.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 5:47 PM on January 2, 2002