If it really is the better mouse trap then consumers will buy it. If not...

WMA should be Mac compatible.Then they would be an open format.

i think a cnet editor's choice costs about $100k.

microsoft bought about 50 last year. chump change.

Porting their DRM to Mac wouldn't make WMA11 an open format.

It would still be proprietary and provide the means for Macs to phone home to Uncle Bill, asking his blessing to keep listening to the music we would be renting from him and MTV.

When did this term start being applied to iPod and iTunes? The "ecosystem" is really between iPod and the numerous vendors who supply accessories for iPod. The competition would find it impossible to duplicate that aspect of the iPod experience.

"Microsoft, MTV, and iRiver recently teamed up to offer an integrated music service to compete with Apple."

If it's three companies, it will probably be as well integrated as Windows is to the hardware and software products from vendors. Each "portion" of this so-called integrated package will have its own profit agenda. And what about Microsoft's other "partners." Don't they feel betrayed at not being a part of this "integration"?

On the Apple side, iTunes and iTunes Music Store are just tools in the overall strategy to sell more iPods.

[How can CNET write that the software is still BETA and it has bugs, but we'll still rate it an "excellent."]

Enough said! cause I got the URGE to piss all over Bill Gates and company. Pathetic desperate morons

WMA should be Mac compatible.Then they would be an open format.

No, it wouldn't. But, then, if you want to push that agenda, I think we should be arguing that iTunes won't be considered open until it can work under linux.

[How can CNET write that the software is still BETA and it has bugs, but we'll still rate it an "excellent."]

Easy. Regardless of the bugs, or that its in Beta, its still has good quality. h***, all you people always claim you can't get rid of all bugs. And regardless of the problems, each OS X release seems to be considered 'killer' or something.

It would still be proprietary and provide the means for Macs to phone home to Uncle Bill, asking his blessing to keep listening to the music we would be renting from him and MTV.

As opposed to iTMS music, which needs iTunes to work and must phone home in order for it to play. Hope your internet works when you set up a new computer, otherwise all that music will just be sitting there.

louzer, you obviously don't know much about how cNet rates. They have historically NEVER given a beta product an excellent rating due to the fact that its not finished.

They are so anti-iPod they are willing to go ahead and rate this new "integration" excellent and think it might be the new ipod killer.

What a joke.

"Hope your internet works when you set up a new computer..."

Hey, I hope "your internet" works too. A computer that is NEVER able to connect to "your internet" would not be too useful these days...

At least the iTMS songs will continue to play once the computer is "linked" to the iTunes account (up to five PCs and/or Macs per iTunes account), unlike rental scheme. There, you need a recurring (not just one time) connection to the internet AND you need to keep paying the monthly fee forever.

From what I see ... this new outfit is offering platform specific (Windows) software, a US only service, and doesn't work with over 70% of the players on the market. That's not the kind of "choice" and "freedom" I look for in a product.

Next please.