THE RECORD COMPANIES ARE BIG FAT GREEDY WHORES

Well I will not be paying more than 99 cents for any song. Already early in this whole new way to sell music and the labels are trying to squeeze every cent outta people. All songs should be 99 cents or less, all albums 9.99 or less. Word. I want complete albums too, when I go to Santanas section on the iTMS they have his newest album but without the singles, partial albums suck, and not having the singles out is even worse, Record companies need to be giving a little more content.

hopefully competition will help ease prices downward. I think 99 cents a song is a fair price, and 9.99 an album isn't bad at all.

I can't fault any business for trying to maximize their profits. With the execption of some subcription based services, there was no pricing model for the market Apple was entering. Using their best judgement for everyone involved, 99 cents appears to be a good middle ground.

What hope will happen is the following: In addition to increased competition easing prices down, the shear volume of having windows users on iTMS will decrease prices. Exposing iTMS to millions of additional users will increase sales. As a result, I can see Apple decreasing the price of songs from 99 cents to perhaps 89 cents - again due the shear 'bulk' of new business.

Then again, prices could go up... gulp!

... i know you want to...

Who cares about a gain or loss of 10 cents? Geez, just keep it consistent. We all know that they can charge for

the post on my blog says it all. i ran it through my translator and see what this actually all means :-)
http://homepage.mac.com/macsatin

Geesh, when it debuted, some people thought the prices should be based on popularity (make newer stuff cost more, put older stuff out there with lower prices). Now someone's actually thinking that, and all of a sudden its the end of the world. Why shouldn't the prices fluctuate. They do in stores and elsewhere. New CDs go for much more than the older stuff.

"As a result, I can see Apple decreasing the price of songs from 99 cents to perhaps 89 cents - again due the shear 'bulk' of new business."

Remember, we're talking about the record companies here, not just Apple. These are the same record companies that think $18.99 for one f****** CD at Tower Records is reasonable. Their inclinationis not to lower prices is to raise them. If left up to them, we'll be paying $18.99 for downloading one CD in the future. We consumers need to resist their effort to d*** around with prices by refusing to buy if they get out of line. This is a chance to send a message to the fat pigs sitting on the top floors of these companies.

Power to the people.

come on, Apple, you've missing a huge opportunity by not releasing iTunes for Winblows soon after the launch of iTMS. now, it's only coming at the end of the year. Apple screws up, again.

They should've had dual-platform support from day one!

IMO it was pretty stupid of them to rush the deployment before all the pieces were in place.

Still, the Mac version has proved the viability of a user-friendly (as opposed to a user-fiendly) service. Sure, there's DRM and the Linux zealots can't stand that, but the user isn't hamstrung the way he is with BuyMusic's DRM.

Come to think of it, maybe AAPL did the right thing after all. They knew all these other services were going to be coming, and they decided to wait. Let the Mac version loose, and let the praise flow from the media. Then the Windows-only people will try to make their own version of the ITMS and fail miserably. Then AAPL can release the ITMS for Windows along with iTunes for Windows, featuring the same ease of use found in the Mac version. They can then trumpet their service, talk about how easy it is to use, and how the user isn't held captive with overly restrictive DRM and they can clean up and own the market.

Hmmmm...