Windows Media Player 11 and Urge 488
j0e_average writes "The Washington Post is running a review of Microsoft's next version of Media Player, and its integration with MTV's new music service Urge. According to reviewer, Rob Pegoraro, 'Not only does this new, Windows XP-only software promote Urge to the exclusion of other retailers, you can't shop at this store-- or even just play your Urge downloads -- in any earlier version of Windows Media Player.' The Microsoft/Urge subscription model contains a new twist as well: 'Urge also lets you rent songs: $9.95 a month (or $99 a year) lets you download all the tracks you want to a computer, while $14.95 ($149 a year) lets you transfer those downloads to most newer Windows Media-compatible players. These rented songs can't be burned to CD and go silent if you stop paying the fees.'"
i bet (Score:5, Funny)
Oh reeeeely? We'll see.
Re:i bet (Score:2)
Re:i bet (Score:5, Insightful)
My guess is this won't be perfect--I have certain reservations about MTV as a distributor, inasmuch as I have no basis for assuming that they'll be competent and, given the performance of other services (a la Napster) the burden of proof is on them. Nevertheless, despite points to the contrary, I believe that this is unquestionably a step in the right direction. It represents a value to the consumer and, moreover, some real competition in the ITMS/iPod dominated digital music market--who knows, it might even persuade people that there are reasonable alternatives to a $400 piece of music-playing hardware(not that I'm claiming the iPod is a bad product, but it's Apple--charing a premium for hardware is what they DO).
Re:Resonable price is not renting (Score:2)
Then buy it. It's not like they stopped offering CDs or iTunes. But some people will find it more convienient to rent. For instance, I will be moving into an apartment soon.
"Renting" music, no matter how you see it or DRM, is entirely different that buying on credit, and there are plenty of reasons w
Re:Resonable price is not renting (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Resonable price is not renting (Score:4, Informative)
DRM is a bastardization of copyright law. And I quote [byu.edu]:
Re:Resonable price is not renting (Score:5, Insightful)
You claimed control "is the whole point of copyright in the first place." I claim it is not. I think we both agree it has been perverted from its original purpose (notably by the term extension from 14 years to up to 120+ years), but the original purpose was to encourage, through financial incentive of limited term monopoly, the creation and duplication of creative works so they would enter the public domain and raise the overall cultural IQ, hence the name "copyright." If its purpose was to control who can and cannot view/listen/whatever to a creative work, it would have been called "controlright" or some other silly name.
Re:i bet (Score:5, Funny)
Re:i bet (Score:3, Funny)
Then I touched my ears, and they were both bleeding...
Re:i bet (Score:5, Insightful)
...File this one under "If I can hear it, I can record it."
Re:i bet (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:i bet (Score:5, Interesting)
Considering the fact that high-quality, free music can be obtained without any sort of DRM cracking, there's really no incentive to crack the iTunes DRM system.
Re:i bet (Score:3)
Re:i bet (Score:3)
Re:i bet (Score:5, Informative)
Re:i bet (Score:5, Funny)
Re:i bet (Score:4, Funny)
Re:i bet (Score:4, Funny)
Screw friends, just hook the audio out to the audio in on your own computer!
Re:i bet (Score:5, Interesting)
Just make sure that you mute the record output (monitoring) level - otherwise you'll end up with a wonderful feedback loop!
It's actually more difficult than you might expect to be able to record your computers output - it actually would be an easier solution to use a second PC. Just make sure that you've got your equalizer set to something reasonably flat, otherwise you'll have too much bass and treble.
Pretty funny how we've now come full circle - doesn't this remind you of the tape trading days? Next thing you know we'll be playing back + recording sounds at twice the speed (so that you could tape an album in half the time...) - ahh, those were the days. Made it easier to slow down a fast guitar solo :)
Re:i bet (Score:3, Informative)
Virtual Audio Loopback Cable (Score:4, Informative)
Re:i bet (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:i bet (Score:3, Funny)
Actually, MS will be requiring you to use HDCP for this too, via a HDMI connection. If you do not have a secure digital connection, fear not: you will be able to hear the kazoo rendition just fine.
Re:i bet (Score:4, Interesting)
But this DRM shit is why I refuse to use itunes- allofmp3.com for me.
Re:i bet (Score:2)
Re:i bet (Score:2)
Alas, allofmp3 is going, going... (Score:3, Interesting)
Translation: You can still connect to the servers using alltunes, but cannot order music at this time.
Re:i bet (Score:2, Informative)
Re:i bet (Score:5, Funny)
Audio comes -out- of one, right? Goes to your speakers.
Well, our informants in the underground scene have reported that you can use an top-of-the-line, cracker-produced, DRM-busting hyper-cable, and subtley 're-direct' the flow of audio, into an 'audio recording device'. Or, more ingeniously, back into the computer, and into an 'audio recording application'.
Mum's the word.
We have you surrounded (Score:4, Funny)
You are in violation of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. Come out with your hands up, bend over, this won't hurt a bit.
Why certainly! (Score:5, Informative)
And just for shits and giggles, you could use FreeMe [cryptome.org] or DRM2WMV [slashdot.org] for Windows Media 10 DRM'd files.
Trust me, cracking 11 is just a matter of time.
Re:i bet (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:i bet (Score:5, Informative)
Or you can burn to CD, rip from CD, with no extra software required.
Or buy iTunes music through the Sharp Musique [nanocrew.net] app, an iTunes store interface that simply skips the tawdry part where they encrypt and DRM the file.
Or use the older stuff, like QTFairUse [wikipedia.org], VLC Media Player [wikipedia.org], and PlayFair [osxhax.com].
Re:i bet (Score:3, Interesting)
It can record any song being played on your computer and automatically enters all the tag info while compressing it to MP3 on the fly (or to uncompressed files if your pc is too slow) It'll record anything that windows media player plays because it just replaces the driver for your soundcard that splits the signal in two. One goes to your hard drive as a new mp3 and one streamed out your soundcard.
Simple.
DRM is Dead Restrictive Moneygrubbing
It will never work
WMPlayer 11 beta (Score:3, Informative)
Ooh! Ooh! DRM! Yay! (Score:2, Funny)
Not.
Re:Ooh! Ooh! DRM! Yay! (Score:3, Funny)
Yes very funny, you don't know how many bottles of champagne were popped and subsequently wasted because of your delayed 'Not' comment.
Huh? (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
How is this a new twist? (Score:5, Interesting)
How is this a "new twist"? Listen Rhapsody [real.com] has been using this model for years.
Re:How is this a new twist? (Score:2)
Re:How is this a new twist? (Score:5, Insightful)
At least with the $0.99/track pricing model, I know that music is mine, no matter what the RIAA and Apple decide is a fair price 5 years down the road.
Re:How is this a new twist? (Score:3, Informative)
That statement is also a lie. To the best of my knowledge, none of the Windows Media compatible mobile phones can touch the DRM used in Windows Media files. Pehaps they have a line of portable players that can, but I've never seen them.
Re:How is this a new twist? (Score:2)
Should be called "Purge" (Score:5, Funny)
Purge, that's funny. (Score:2)
Who says you have to stop paying your bills to have that happen?
Coincidentally (Score:3, Funny)
sigh (Score:5, Insightful)
Music should be simple to enjoy. Music doesn't need safeguarding the way the industry jealously guards their Jewel Crowns.
I do "support" outside my everyday professional experience for family and friends, and describing "how to" is a minefield and Media Player 11/Urge don't help.
I've not verified what the article says, but the warning is WMP11 is more than an update, it's an upgrade, i.e., the only way to recover from it to previous versions is with System Restore. WTF?
I guess that helps me decide, I'm not going to load it, I'm going to steer anyone who's interested away from it, and anyone who has questions about it, I'll turn away.
I won't single out Microsoft for the miserable state of music and the ability to enjoy today. Everyone seems to be trying their best to squeeze money from entertainment. I'm not opposed to paying for entertainment, but I come from an older generation where:
I remember early on with CDs the promise of things to come. Heck, my first CD player actually had a DIN connector on the back of it which was referenced in the manual only as "for future use". I dreamed of liner notes running to the TV, lyrics, lots of cool stuff. It never happened.
And when did album info become available? When the public contributed it via the early public CDDB database. That was a great thing, but was (and still is) fraught with errors and the fickleness of description by the first contributor in.
This was the first of many betrayals by the music industry, and I've not seen any push back that looks promising.
WMP11 is just one more non-contributor to the music-enjoying demographic. They're all selling themselves as providing an entertainment "experience". They're all full of shit.
Re:sigh (Score:2, Informative)
When you get to the ADD/REMOVE Programs window, click the check box at the top that says "Show Updates."
As for the rights of our music, it should be ours (to do with it as we please--listen, rip, destroy it with a shredder, or resell it) we bought it!
-specialk
Re:sigh (Score:4, Insightful)
To quote the late Jerry Garcia: "Make up your own music".
What's the logic here? (Score:5, Interesting)
Even with MTV and Microsoft pushing it together, I think that the fact that you can't burn the music is going to turn away most of their potential customers. People are stupid, but given the choice between owning DRMed music that you can burn or renting it and watching it all vanish when you stop paying...well, I'd hope that people aren't that stupid.
Re:What's the logic here? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What's the logic here? (Score:2)
I would suggest you talk to PT Barnum
The better quote (for this context) I've seen attributed to PT is this:
"No one ever became poor underestimating human intelligence."
("became poor" has been seen as "gone broke" and other similar fragments.
Re:What's the logic here? (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the appeal of having EVERYTHING at the tips of ones fingers is neat, but in reality, people don't listen to EVERYTHING. I mean, of the ten thousand plus songs I have, I listen to like 100 regularly......
Re:What's the logic here? (Score:5, Insightful)
It will be the default install for 95% of computers sold.
That's the great benefit of owning a monopoly. You can use it to dominate markets you wouldn't normally have a hope of even competing in.
Re:What's the logic here? (Score:2)
Re:What's the logic here? (Score:5, Interesting)
I subscribe to Rhapsody [real.com], so I guess I am that stupid.
I know some people feel very... passionately... about "renting" music rather than "owning" it. But I like having access to thousands upon thousands of tracks that I can listen to at any time. Rhapsody has two million tracks.
Am I going to listen to all two million? Of course not. But I have extremely varied tastes and like exploring new music. Last week I was listening to my favorite indie tracks, then I got bored. So I started checking out world music - African, Caribbean, Brazilian. Then I got bored and listened to some hip-hop. Then I got bored and listened to some music from Rent.
In a given week, I'll listen to hundreds of different tracks - most of them brand new to me. How much do I pay? About $12.
But that's ok, call me stupid. ;)
Re:What's the logic here? (Score:2)
I probably shouldn't have used the word "owned;" what I meant to get across there was simply that having the ability to burn the music could very well be the deciding factor. In fact, Rhapsody's a better example here than iTunes is...
If you had the choice between two services with the same functionality but one gave you the ability to burn t
Re:What's the logic here? (Score:2)
Depends on how much more. And if you even listen to music on CDs. I listen either on my comp or through my MP3 player or the mp3 player + fm transmitter in my car.
I download more new songs a month than would cost to buy through Itunes rather than 'rent.'
Another minor detail on the PlaysForSure - you can buy to burn the son
Re:What's the logic here? (Score:5, Interesting)
It is clearly a subscription service and shouldn't be treated as if that is the only choice you get, you can still buy single tracks or buy physical CDs. You trade "buying" 10-15 CDs a year (though you can still buy if you like) for the ability to legally sample any of a few million tracks at any time without having to commit to buying them, and still get to time-shift. To me, that sounds like a decent trade-off.
I don't think a subscription service where you get to subscribe to a huge library for dirt cheap and you get to download what ever you want and keep them forever is a viable business model. I understand basic psychology, people would subscribe for a month for the cost of a single CD and acquire a library of a lifetime and unsubscribe. What you want seems to be the have-your-cake-and-eat-it variety, which frankly, makes you seem a lot like how the RIAA behaves.
Bad Faith Again. (Score:2)
Uhhh, how about the big stab in the rear end this is to Napster, the other "also rans" and their customers? If you have a subscription to one of these other services, you might wish you could have burned those songs because M$ is (from the article),
doing something drastic: It's throwing its own MSN Music store under the bus and launching a new musi
Re:Bad Faith Again. (Score:2)
It seems reasonable to me (Score:2, Interesting)
Consider this: A lot of people are paying similar amounts of money for XM or Sirius satellite radio, and they mostly listen to music. Satellite radio has hundreds of channels that play all kinds of music, but it's still decided by other people what songs you're going to listen to. You can't just turn over to "Classic Rock Channel #1
Re:What's the logic here? (Score:2)
Since the iPod is by far the market leader - doesn't it have something like half of the MP3 player market right now? - that's a HUGE user base that's going to, for the most part, have zero interest in this service. I know that there are people that have MP3 players from Dell, Creative, and the like, and Urge is a viable option for the
Re:What's the logic here? (Score:4, Interesting)
It's Microsoft, dude-- they can't just co-exist with a competitor, everything's got to be an Us-vs-Them-to-the-Death battle.
Personally, I have a 30 gig iPod. If I wanted to fill it up with mp3's purchased at iTunes, it would cost me THOUSANDS of dollars. It would be much more financially responsible to fill it up with "rented" songs, as I could pay $150 a year for decades before it would have been more cost effective to buy them outright.
Why does everyone who makes the "Cost to fill my iPod" pricing argument always ignore the fact that most if not all iPod buyers have a preexisting CD collection with which to populate their device? Also, it would be even more financially responsible to add to your music collection by buying used CDs-- $150 a year would get you at least 15-17 of them, you can rip those tracks to whatever format and quality level you prefer, and they're yours to keep forever with no DRM.
I've got a 30GB iPod as well, and the only songs on it that didn't come from my personal CD collection came from "free song" codes during the iTMS/Pepsi promotions.
~Philly
That's sick. (Score:2)
Re:That's sick. (Score:2)
Re:That's sick. (Score:2)
Re:That's sick. (Score:4, Interesting)
Civilization and culture flourished for thousands of years, and we've only had copyright for about a hundred. I think it's a perversion, and copyright laws especially for music should be repealed. Musicians should go back to making money the old fashioned way, performing. The rest of copyright law should be seriously re-examined too.
That's my opinion.
Re:That's sick. (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, when you get it done let me know.
Musicians should go back to making money the old fashioned way, performing.
Actually, many of them made music from selling sheet music. Besides, at the time if you wanted to hear a song you had to go hear them play it, today with recording media that's no longer the case. So what you're saying, essentially, is that if a musician wants to make money he needs to perform it while you have the "right" to record, copy and redistribute at will? if that's the case they won't make much from concerts either as their live recordings will be spread world wide before he can even get to his second gig! that's not a good business model for the musician and what would you do then? you'd make professional music profitless and you'd have a fine selection of garage bands but quality music would diminish if not die out.
Re:That's sick. (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, at the time when there was no recordings and no digital distribution. Even tho these both involved music you're really talking apples and oranges. The entire idea of recording music changed everything.
I think it would weed out the people who only want to make money at it, and leave the people who have a passion for it.
I honestly don't care what the musicians motivati
Re:That's sick. (Score:3, Interesting)
If by insanely long copyright terms", much less than a hundred. If you mean copyright in general, you're completely wrong. Copyright (& patents) are written into our (I am assuming you're from the US; if not, I apologize and adjust the pronouns accordingly) Constitution. You know, the one that is about 219 years old. And you think our founding fathers got the idea, you should look back further. S
Yo!MTV Craps (Score:5, Funny)
psh.. (Score:4, Funny)
Salesforce.com (Score:5, Insightful)
Electricity, water, resources that have fixed, continuous costs, that makes sense in the consumer's eye....but software? Music? Digital stuff with practically zero reproduction cost? This is what drives people to piracy...they can't visualize the need for software et al to have continuous fees...it feels like extortion.
Despite how justified/neat business model it may be, that's what the average person deep down thinks. RIAA et al do not understand this. MSFT seems to have followed the same path.
Divx? Does anyone remember them (Score:2, Interesting)
No thanks. (Score:2)
Lousy Article; misses a real problem with Urge (Score:5, Informative)
What Urge is missing - and what I was looking forward to - was a low low intro price for the first year. I got the first year of Yahoo - including to go - for $60.
Also, Urge is more expenensive than Yahoo as you can get the non-to-go version for only $5 at Yahoo rather than $10 at Urge.
All the other complaints in the article - old news. Either the PlayforSure thing is for you or it isn't.
wonderful (Score:2, Funny)
Not a consumer-oriented model (Score:2)
As much as people tend to bash it, but speaking in relative terms, iTMS still has the most consumer-friendly terms compared to other major players out there. Subscription models work only for magazines and pron accounts... an no one takes my magazines away if I end my subscription to it.
Re:Not a consumer-oriented model (Score:3, Informative)
Compulsory License (Score:2)
Hasn't the EFF proposed a compulsory license plan as a solution to the problem of file sharing? That makes it good, right?
Worst of Both Worlds (Score:2)
If the recording industry actually worked under that fair system, they'd have to sell a lot better quality new music to actually earn a living off current recording artists. Instead, they just rip off everything they possibly can, and p
Wait.. I know! (Score:2)
I'd really like to see that in court.
At first glance.... (Score:3, Insightful)
There is a large segment of the public that doesn't want to put the cash down for a serious music collection and this could be their way of getting a wide selection without the price tag on a large permanent music collection.
Not so much... (Score:4, Insightful)
None of the aformentioned technologies were designed with the end-user in mind. Did anybody at Microsoft/URGE even sit down and think about whether or not their customers really wanted to be tied yet another proprietary format that works only with a certain manufacturer's proprietary player? Lets face it, the iPod/iTunes interface only works because the iPod's particular proprietary format has become not-so-proprietary because more than half of the Audio Players out there are iPods, and can use Fairplay'd songs.
Here is what I want. An easy-to-use, universal encryption scheme everyone can agree on. Make it burnable. Make it sharable. Make it brain-dead simple. Make all of the record companes pledge their unwavering support. Heck, Make it 4096-bit RSA if you really want to. Then make it easy to use, and have all new audio players - Apple, Dell, Creative, MS, etc - support it. Then drop the price to 49 cents a song and $5.99 a record, and watch your profits SOAR. Why would they soar? Because at those prices, with those features, and those major names backing it, nobody would really feel like hunting on a Gnutella network for a decent-quality version of their favorite John Tesh song. People would willingly buy the audio player they liked, because they could use their songs on all of them. Illegal song sharing would largely dry up. Record companies would be happy. OEMs would be happy. I would be happy.
Just my (slightly more than) 2 cents.
Re:Not so much... (Score:5, Insightful)
When CDs first came out, the cry was "perfect sound forever." When audiophiles started to complain about the sound quality, the industry claimed that they were hearing things (with the exception of the high-end, who sold insane CD players). Now that the CD is standard and players are zero-profit commodities, they need to come up with a new format which forces people to buy new gear and replace all of their music again. Enter SACD and HDCD. Suddenly, the very people that used to tell us that CDs are perfect, are now claiming that the new format(s) are MUCH better sounding than crappy old CDs.
None of this is intended to benefit the consumer or the musician. Let me repeat that: None of this is intended to benefit the consumer or the musician!" The music industry exists for no reason other than making money, and the most efficient way of doing that is to screw the consumer.
URGE in practice (Score:4, Interesting)
I didn't really get it when it was first pitched, but the hybrid subscription/paid model works great. In the years I was using iTunes, I never really did much purchasing of tracks, since it seemed ephemeral, and not really any cheaper than buying on physical media.
With URGE, I pay my flat fee, and can try ANYTHING - it isn't $9.99 ever time I want to give an album a spin to see whether or not I like it beyond 30 second previews. I can play it on any of three different PCs, and can even transfer songs to my Treo to listen to on the plane, or stream them live to my Xbox 360 for an entertainment experience. And if I like something, I can just buy it just like iTunes and burn it to CD or whatever.
As for pricing, $15/month for as much new stuff as I want to listen to? I've already got 20 new albums in rotation, stuff I likely wouldn't have bought before but found via the recommendation system, and really enjoy (I'm embarassingly obsessed with the Arctic Monkeys now). Ast $15/month, the amount I would have paid buying that music would have covered the fee for years.
A couple of cool little features:
A good selection of music videos, linked to the songs.
After setting up a new machine on your account, you can tell it to sync up to EVERYTHING you have on your other machines.
Even though there are the three recommended machines, any PlaysForSure device seems to work fine, like my Treo 700w phone, and an ancient Creative MuVo I had laying around.
Anyway, I've been really happy with it, and after years of trying to get a good home-wide music experience out of iTunes, it's already working a lot better for me, in large part to support by a much wider selection of accesory vendors.
Re:URGE in practice (Score:3, Interesting)
I get music from the library. I listen to music at the store before buying it. I borrow it from my friends. Paying to listen to it before paying to buy it is the sort of marketing that only makes sense if you don't think too hard about it.
How about this: Maybe clothes stores should start charging rental fees to try on clothes before you buy them. Car dealerships can start charging rental fees for test drives. What a wonderful
Re:URGE in practice (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, URGE is about 2M tracks, which I imagine is quite a bit more than even a large library.
I'm so unimpressed. (Score:4, Interesting)
As for pricing, $15/month for as much new stuff as I want to listen to? I've already got 20 new albums in rotation, stuff I likely wouldn't have bought before but found via the recommendation system, and really enjoy ... Ast $15/month, the amount I would have paid buying that music would have covered the fee for years.
Wow, for fifteen bucks a month plus the cost of all the newest M$ toys and software, I can stream my music to my TV where my $40/month cable subscription already pipes 30 channels of endless hours of music I already don't listen to? Fantastic! Besides that music source I don't listen to, there's plenty of online music streams these days. You know, like the internet archive [archive.org] and their 34,000 live concerts? Don't forget the creative commons people, who also want to promote worth while music. Why would I want to rent a source of music from the usual RIAA pigs again?
What was it that WiMP has that Amarok [kde.org] was lacking? Wait a minute, WiMP does not do lyrics, cover art or even wikipedia lookups?
Sarcasm off. The RIAA and Microsoft are both based on a scarcity that does not exist. The music publishers are damaged and people have routed around them. Microsoft too has been routed around. There are plenty of alternatives to both. Restricting your users while other do not is fatal. Your supposed world of plenty looks awfully limited.
Re:I'm so unimpressed. (Score:4, Interesting)
But as a busy guy with three small children, searching out the good stuff via those other means just isn't worth the time and attention involved. That was my problem with Napster back in the day - just too darn much of a pain in the butt to get a full album, well encoded, with correct metadata. Better to spend that time to write an article, get a check, and just buy the CDs. The scarcity isn't music. It's the music I wan't, in high enough quality that it doesn't bug me, with the right metadata, with a pricing model that doesn't penalize me for experimentation.
$15/month isn't even 10% of our monthly entertainment budget around here, but it's sure more than 10% fo my entertainment value right now.
10 years ago, I had a $200/month used CD habit. URGE gives me the same shopping experience for a lot less money and shelf space, and naked (it's a muggy night here in Portland...).
Oh, FYI, WMP does do lyrics (look in the Options), although I haven't seen much yet with that data populated.
WMP11 supports many retailers besides URGE (Score:3, Interesting)
WMP11 supports many retailers besides URGE, as can be seen here [pcmag.com].
Here's a link to the PCMag review of WMP11 that contains the above page. [pcmag.com]
The retailers shown in the above links are:
MSN Music Store
audible.com
Napster
MovieLink
WallMart
XM Satellite Radio
f.y.e.
Live365.com
PureTracks
PassAlong
URGE
That's fewer than the number of retailers that WMP10 supports (WMP supports the above (minus URGE) plus CinemaNow, CourtTV, emusic, ESDC, MLB, msn/soundsgood.com, MusicGiants, MusicMatch, musicNow, MyStation, SongTouch, soundBuzz, GetMusic), but WMP11 is still in beta, and may very well support all of those when the RTM version is released.
Re:They just don't get it. (Score:2)
Re:Oops! Someone Didn't Proofread (bad Enter key) (Score:4, Funny)
Not only do I declare you a grammar Nazi, I also declare you a spelling Frenchman.
Re:Oops! Someone Didn't Proofread (bad Enter key) (Score:4, Insightful)
"Godwin's law" (which the term itself I hate) is so stupid that it's a shame that it's even still mentioned anywhere.
As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving any subject matter approaches one.
It's just plain foolishness that people invoke "Godwin's law" to defend themselves.
Re:I am the only one who (Score:2)
Re:I am the only one who (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Now the real voting begins.... (Score:2)
Sure, the tracks "die" when you stop the subscription, but that's the understanding you were supposed to be getting when you sign up, they weren't telling you you were buying-to-keep an infinite number of tracks for $149 a year. Any assumpion otherwise is that of people that can't or even read at
Re:When I hear the name 'Urge', I think of... (Score:5, Funny)