the main "idiot is Ballmer_ But that's beside the point_ M$ is out to make a buck and not give up the buck they just made_ So them rolling over their existing customers on the closing service to give them incentive to migrate to the newer services is a snow ball's chance in hell_

I can see the lawsuit being more focused on the term "music purchase" instead of targeting the company 'cause they no longer support an out-dated service_ Never been to MSN Music - but if they were wording things to the tune of purchasing the music for use under the DRM Terms and then can only run the music on something validated by the service - then it can be argued that it was in fact NOT a purchase - but more akin to leasing or renting the music to begin with_ So first item I'd go after is a class-action False Advertising Suit including Misrepresentation of a product_ More solid than bitching about a product that went defunct_

Otherwise that would be like people suing Apple for not still supporting System 7_

the more that every other company out there tries to sell people on their music download service, the more that companies like Microsoft s**** over users of their older, failed music download services...

...the better iTunes looks. It's always there, it's not going away, and music buyers can therefore have confidence that it's not going to dry up and blow away tomorrow or next month or next year, leaving them high-and-dry. Unlike pretty much every other service.

Don't even get me started on subscription music services.

That is why iTunes allows you to burn the music to a cd. Its not perfect but it covers that issue.

Unless, of course, your machine(s) that are authorized is dead, and you can't put it on another machine to authoroize to burn them. (Nothing more fun than burning 500 discs of music, re-importing them, re-doing the tracks/labels, just because the system went down).

Oh, and maybe you didn't realize this, but you can't burn any video content to disk. Only music.

testudo, Microsuck has a history of s******* over both its business partners (PlaysForSure, anybody?) and its customers ("Vista-ready" PCs, Zune players which don't play 'PlaysForSure', and now this).

PlaysForSure still works, and devices and vendors can still use it. So how, exactly, did they s**** these people over? Bringing up the Zune is odd, since everyone here seems to think no one has ever bought one.

And Vista-Ready PCs was due to the hardware makers pressuring MS to reduce their 'requirements'. Oh, and Vista-ready PCs actually can run Vista. They just might not support all the glitz (which, again, people here seem to think is useless).

Apple, not so much.

Gee, I have a Beige G3 that Apple said would be fully supported with OS X. Oops, maybe not 'fully' supported.

Apple has also no problem killing products or features they decide aren't necessary, without regard to their customers. Oh, right, I keep forgetting, backwards compatibility is bad and should never be attempted.

And Apple has no business partners to s****. They keep their iPod stuff to themselves.

good points uberfu, but really, I doubt that anybody was seriously harmed by Microsoft WRT this decision. It got so little use, what's the most losses that any single user suffered?

That's not to say that a class-action suit would be 'stupid' or pointless; just that the damages may be next to negligible. The real damage is to Microsoft's reputation, already battered by Vista and various other fiascos over the years.

Why would I buy a Zune and purchase music from Microsoft Marketplace, if a year or three from now they may do the same thing they just did here? How can one trust them not to make the same cutthroat s****-the-customers business decision they did here?

Microsoft compensate people somehow? Let's say I bought 50 tracks from MSN Music. Give me credit for 50 tracks at Microsoft Marketplace. Allow me to exchange those same MSN Music tunes for Microsoft Marketplace tunes.

Apparently Microsoft doesn't give a s*** about customer goodwill. Apparently they have not learned s*** from all the PC users jumping ship due to the Vista disaster and pent-up frustrations with Windows over the years.

...the better iTunes looks. It's always there, it's not going away, and music buyers can therefore have confidence that it's not going to dry up and blow away tomorrow or next month or next year, leaving them high-and-dry. Unlike pretty much every other service.

Well, who says it isn't going away? Just because it's there today doesn't mean Apple won't decide that digital music is so 20th century and turn to something else.

Who it makes look really good is Amazon, because you don't give a damn if they're there or not.

you are really tiresome. Begone, foul troll.

i'm with you climac. testudo lives to quote other posters. i like to read people's thoughts on an issue so i read the forums. some are insightful, some are not. what i don't like to read is people's thoughts on people's thoughts. it's tiresome and old. quote after quote after quote after... he never has a take of his own on a subject, he can only react to other peoples takes.

if you have an original thought, post it, otherwise, geesh, find a hobby.

Period, full stop, end of story, doesn't know what he's talking about, is full of s***, etc etc ad nauseum.

If Apple went out of business TOMORROW, my DRM'd tracks from iTunes will still play FOREVER. Sometime between now and forever I really should backup my purchases, but that's true of ANY software FROM ANYONE.

MSN Music customers, on the other hard, ARE SCREWED. Even a four-year-old can tell the difference. But I guess Testy hasn't quite reached that level of maturity.

The lessons to be learned here are simple: 1. DRM-free music is best. Apple suports this, MS does not. 2. Never trust MS. They s**** you. Apple doesn't. 3. Testudo's posts are as worthless as he is, and should be ignored.

How hard was that??

"stores" does MS have? Do they have as many "active stores" as they do versions of Vista operating systems??

Sticking with one idea that has the foresight to "grow" in other avenues down the future, ie. music players, movies, tv shows e-books, etc, makes the world less complicated and a better end user experience. MS should try it once and a while.

"The company doesn't provide a reason for the shutdown but is believed to be both a question of cost-cutting measures as well as a means of steering customers towards newer and more active stores, including Microsoft's own Zune Marketplace."

testudo lives to quote other commenters and desperately searches for one tiny little opening for a counter-argument, even if he's completely wrong or mistaken about his premises.

It's one thing to have a good counter-argument to make, but testudo seems to have this OCD about making counter-arguments no matter how ridiculous they are. "OMG, OS X runs, but doesn't run all that well on my Beige G3, therefore Apple is as bad as Microsoft!"

Just... f******... shoot me.

What about the million and millions of DELL DJ Ditty owners? What to do?

Actually, testudo has a small point. If Apple closed the iTMS today, and your computer broke tomorrow, you could not just transfer your DRMed iTMS songs to a new Mac - they would not authorize to play. This is the problem with DRM.

However, what testudo failed to point out is that MS has billions of dollars and running a key registration server really doesn't cost a lot of money. There's no legitimate reason for MS to do this. This is an underhanded tactic to get them to move to a new store.

Testudo also failed to point out that Apple *could* close the iTMS, but hasn't done so, yet he is judging them as if they did. He also fails to point out that Apple is trying to remove DRM from all of their music and MS would rather further it by giving money to record labels (Universal) and charging their customers for that "privilege."

They're actually offering storage media that's tanked at a REAL 1/2 TB instead of 500 GB. Next thing we know, they'll be easily-swappable...

there are quite a few things about testudo that are small, I'd bet. Psychologists often refer to this as, 'overcompensating for an inadequacy'.

at Microsoft decided that it was cost-inefficient to continue supporting MSN Music-purchased tunes, even the small cost of the server. After all, it generates no revenue and it only makes sense to discontinue supporting legacy users of a dead business.

Of course, the loss of goodwill was never factored into that calculation, nor a migration to Microsoft Marketplace which was fair to former MSN Music users. Surely it would not have been that difficult nor expensive to do something user-friendly for people who had MSN Music tunes.

Do you think any of those folks are going to buy music at Microsoft Marketplace after getting the shaft from them? I sure wouldn't. I'd make a point of buying an iPod and sending to Ballmer's attention, a copy of the receipt for that along with a copy of the receipt for the songs I purchased from iTunes to replace the MSN Music songs they killed.

Thank you hayesk, well put. Anyone suggesting that our ITS could as easily do what MS is doing is just saying so for the academic of the debate. It's far less likely as we've seen the reputations of MS and Apple. It's not a matter of whether they have both done anti-consumer things, it's really about the degree and the difference is enormous. The public backlash to disabling iTS DRM tracks would be enormous.

I stay completely away from DRM now but what I used to do is burn audio CDs for all my ITS DRM tracks as a DRM-free backup. I hope those affected by this are smart enough to get that done now if they can and care.

What a bad decision it was to splinter the WM DRM in bits, every store has its own authorization and (non-)commitment to the store. Every store that closes adds more bad press and has an unacceptably bad user experience.

iTunes, Amazon and Zune have a more trusted backing but MS is less trustworthy because off the WMA DRM fiasco.

I think testudo is the only guy in here that knows what he is talking about. Suggestion to the rest of you, before you make a comment, read the full article, not just the biased blurb produced on this communist blog.

Climacs, you can't take a little criticism? Even the thought of Mac doing something bad, or MS doing something good really bothers you, eh? You are tiresome.

If you are looking for a forum where everyone will agree that Mac is the best try an old folk's home.

If Apple went out of business TOMORROW, my DRM'd tracks from iTunes will still play FOREVER. Sometime between now and forever I really should backup my purchases, but that's true of ANY software FROM ANYONE.

MSN Music customers, on the other hard, ARE SCREWED. Even a four-year-old can tell the difference. But I guess Testy hasn't quite reached that level of maturity.

Sorry, you are the idiot. Your music will only play as long as you keep your computer and it runs. You have to authenticate your computer to play your music. If your computer crashes, and you move your music, it WILL NOT PLAY.

But, I guess you don't even have the mind of a four-year-old to know the differences aren't that different.

However, what testudo failed to point out is that MS has billions of dollars and running a key registration server really doesn't cost a lot of money. There's no legitimate reason for MS to do this. This is an underhanded tactic to get them to move to a new store.

Didn't need to point it out, since it has nothing to do with the story or the problem with DRM. If your DRM requires some type of authentication, there's the chances things will not work. This holds not only to music or video, but also to software (people just love when their copies of Windows need to be re-authenticated, have to do it by phone, and then have to wait for Monday morning to come around).

Testudo also failed to point out that Apple *could* close the iTMS, but hasn't done so, yet he is judging them as if they did.

Where in the h*** did I judge apple? I'm just pointing out the facts. If you rely on anyone, even apple, for your media to play, you could be in some world of hurt.

He also fails to point out that Apple is trying to remove DRM from all of their music and MS would rather further it by giving money to record labels (Universal) and charging their customers for that "privilege."

Apple SAYS they want to remove DRM from Music, but, h***, even MS could say that, but you wouldn't believe them. (Then again, Apple already has sold so much music and iPods, they know they've locked in a lot of users into their ecosystem, so they can afford to go DRM free now).

And if Universal wants DRM, it's their right. And it's MS's right to do business with them (just like Apple did business with them, but that was different, I'm sure).

BTW, last time I checked, Apple charged its users to buy music, and payed money to the labels to sell their music. So, again, how is this different (oh, right, it's MS vs Apple, and Apple is great and doing everything for the people, and MS is evil just trying to line its pockets with money).

I also don't see Apple saying DRM should disappear for movies/videos. Those are still highly restrictive, more so then music. But I'm sure it has nothing to do with video being the 'next big thing' and Apple wanting to make sure they tie people to their video stores and devices early, like they did with the iPod and music.

(And, yes, the last part was judgemental. But, hey, its not like anyone else here has the ability to see outside the RDF and actually say anything anti-apple).

testudo lives to quote other commenters and desperately searches for one tiny little opening for a counter-argument, even if he's completely wrong or mistaken about his premises.

Gee, I could say the same about all the whiners complaining about my posts, too.

And my premises are rarely wrong. They're just not viewed as being possibly correct by the fanboys.