3 ms·
> But we had music piracy before 1mbps , only limited. Quality has a quality all its own. Music piracy in the era of Old Napster (before they went legitimate)
by cbd1984 11y ago
> But we had music piracy before 1mbps , only limited.
Quality has a quality all its own. Music piracy in the era of Old Napster (before they went legitimate) was terrible. Horrible mislabeled MP3s at a bitrate best described as "wax cylinder quality" with no album artwork or other extras buying a CD would provide. Plus, of course, you were stuck behind dial-up, and even poor-quality MP3s go at about a megabyte of data per minute of music, so you were looking at substantial download times over unreliable connections for anything approaching a full album.
It was wonderful only in that it worked at all, and that it had music record stores wouldn't touch, at least not if you were out in the boonies. It was one of the few pre-YouTube channels for obscure and out-of-print music. However, that didn't make it convenient in any absolute sense, and it was usually only high-quality compared to not having the music at all.
These days, with most torrent software, you can download a whole discography, in high-quality FLAC with full album images and so on, well-organized and correctly labeled, simply by copying-and-pasting a magnet link. Multiple megabyte downloads go by in seconds. The difference in the experiences is night and day.
The music industry got angry at Old Napster. They're being crushed by Bittorrent.
- petra 11y agoSure there we're definitely improvements in music quality.And sure 1mbps wasn't enough , But it was easy to forecast demand for bandwidth - it's reasonable that people will want higher quality music, we had decent guesses what's the maximum bandwidth that would require , and the amount of music people listened to stayed about the same - i.e. a lot. But sure, BitTorrent definitely had a bigger impact on the music industry.