iTunes pricing and DRM schemes updated for 2009

Well Apple has brought down its prices but its not only a question of a company but a matter to look upon as why Apple has slashed its prices. I have my views on http://controversial-affairs.blogspot.com/2009/01/price-or-prize.html

omg, it is really a good news for us, i finally can put itunes songs to my mp3.
i don't buy songs and video from itunes store often.
because i have Aiseesoft iPod Movie Converter.
i found it few monthes before and then i really don't need itunes store. it can convert all the popular formats to iPod video

formats.
have a try here:
http://www.aiseesoft.com/ipod-movie-converter.html
here is also one for mac user:
Aiseesoft iPod Video Converter for Mac
get it here:
http://www.aiseesoft.com/ipod-video-converter-for-mac.html

Was the DRM really that bad? Was being able to play a song ONLY on five computers really so bad? Who was burning more than seven CDs off a single playlist? And if you are trying to use an MP3 player other than an iPod/iPhone, why are you using iTunes anyway?

There was actually a funny "news" article on this topic... "People with six or more computers rejoice over iTunes DRM changes." :)

http://www.maccomedy.com/people-with-six-or-more-computers-rejoice-over-itunes-drm-changes/

Is it possible to upgrade 'some' of my music to iTunes Plus? It seems to be all or nothing, and I've got 122 songs that are upgradeable. I only really want a couple of albums upgraded

I wonder now, if MicroSoft will go DRM-Free...?

iTunes music is drm-free now, but for the old itunes users, full of music must pay a 30-cent upgrade per song, 60 cents for video upgrades, it seems a bit expensive and isn't worthwhile, the very economical way I use is with this media converter, it can handle with all types drm and common video music files, and also supports batch conversion, works easy and great:)

http://www.wmatomp3-converter.com/digital-media-converter-pro.html#123

@Andre: Clearly, the downloadable options available right now aren't suitable for your tastes and your purposes. And that's fine; I totally respect your views.

But do you really find it *impossible* to understand why others don't weigh the various factors the same way that you do? It seems to me that this is the biggest problem in the tech blogosphere -- if something doesn't fit someone's own purposes (removable batteries, DRM, or whatever), they call it useless and imply that anyone who purchases it is somehow misinformed.

This self-centered logic was used to dismiss the iPod Mini, the MacBook Air, and the iPhone, among others.

If uncompressed WAV files were available from iTunes for the same price as AAC files, I'd still choose the AAC files. They require substantially less storage (on both my laptop and my iPhone), and I can't hear a difference between them. For the same reason, I shoot photos in JPEG rather than RAW. (Believe it or not, I am a professional photographer, and JPEGs work fine for my purposes.)

Physical CDs? I'd have to pay $10 for an entire album, even if I'm only interested in one or two songs. I also need to take extra time and effort to rip the CD into MP3s or AAC files. I've bought fewer than a dozen CDs since the iTunes Music Store opened up, and I don't miss them at all.

I'm not trying to convince you to buy compressed music files -- based on your comments, you wouldn't be happy with them. I'm just honestly shocked that you can't comprehend the reasons why some of us do.

I can confirm the iTunes store works with the first gen. iPhone over EDGE

Riddle me this:
Mer de Noms costs £7.99
Mer de Noms (iTunes Plus) costs £7.99
If I already paid £7.99 for the original DRM laden version, why should I have to pay an extra £2 to 'upgrade', when the cost of the albums is the same??

very interesting.... too bad i found shockhound... i may use itunes again to download music...