I can get songs for less than $0.60 apiece on average, with no DRM, encoded at as high a bitrate as I like, with a free hard copy in a lossless format! It’s called the “used CD section” at the local indy record store, and it’s balls-out better value and quality than iTunes.
Until iTunes offers me the equivilant quality without DRM and at a lower price, then they can take their crap and shovel it.
My purchasing habits are the same, I’d much rather own a CD than a file I downloaded, I don’t think anyone’s suggesting this as a perfect replacement for that, but for someone who is going to buy digital music, this is a good thing.
Generally I agree but iTunes does offer some advantages: everywhere (no “local indy record stores” with used CD sections around me, and even around my college a few closed up in my time there - they’re dissapearing), one song at a time, open 24/7 etc. etc.
If possible I’d much rather have the hard copy but iTunes, eMusic, etc. have their place.
I don’t understand how such a high price can be placed on what amounts to such a minor convinience. Clearly, my valuation of “instant gratification” is set many notches below that of the general populus, because I seem to be the only person left on the planet who doesn’t own at least one song off of iTunes.
I’m album-oriented, I like my CD shelf, and I won’t even put songs lower than 192kbps avbr on my DAP, so clearly, I’m a demographic that just isn’t ever going to have a place in the digital music spectrum.
Without a physical copy, without album art I can hold and look at, without true portability, what iTunes offers to me isn’t worth more than $0.25 per song, and I don’t think I’ll be interested until it hits that price point.
I doubt Apple is really gonna be let down that I’m not gonna be a customer to them anytime soon, though.