Will YOU pay for Napster?

[pulse8]

Well, I guess the idea is that if it's appealing again, people will move back to it.

 

[TripleJ]

That's right pulse8. Wow, someone changed their mind about something on here! Whatever next .

 

[chainbolt]

negative

 

[Nutdotnet]

Well of course it would have to be if there service returned to what it was.

No one would be dumb enough to pay for what they have currently.

I know that there are other services out there like AudioGalaxy, Morpheus, etc....but I really like Napster and I would be happy to pay $20-$30 for a years worth of unlimited use.

 

[ElPool]

<< I like Morepheus, but the software doesn't seem as well written as Napster. I could be wrong, I'm not a programmer, but it doesn't seem to run as smoothly. >>



morpheus works much better than napster ever did, for me at least. automaticaly finds another download if yours gets disconnected.

i think the whole reason napster became so popular is that everyone wants something for nothing. and $20 a month aint nuthong. it will fail as FREE and NON-CENTRALIZED substitutes become better and easier to use.

 

[Sluggo]

I might pay for high quality MP3's not some of the crap a lot of people were posting up on Napster. Took forever to find a high sample rate, with a good connection.

 

[Aenygma]

LOLOL pay for an mp3??? I have never used napster, and I have over 3,000

( course they are all backups of cd's I own )

 

[elchen]

sure i would

 

Why when I can get it for free?

Unless its 100% uptime guaranteed, all files are 192kbs, and no broken downloads.

Which will not happen for a while.

 

[bonkers325]

mo

 

[serialb]

Why not everyone switch to AudioGalaxy? Once you remove the webHancer crap, it works like a champ and even resume downloads.

 

[Dameon]

no. never.

 

[syzygy]

to early to say. wait and see. there may be a trial period with the
new service. if not, i'll still consider them. napster does have
name prestige, above and far beyond all other file sharing services,
and they may again attract the largest server base, with the most
libraries, and the greatest number of songs. no other service receives
press coverage and probably never will. notoriety is good

 

[bigbootydaddy]

nope, morpheus.

 

[Looney]

First off... if there do charge a fee, it will most likely be much more than $20 a year. More like $10/month.

But even then, i wouldn't. With the way Napster works, you're voluntarily sharing your files to access other people's files. You're giving out your bandwidth so others can download your songs... so why should I have to pay for this? If anything, Napster should be compensating me for putting my bandwidth and storage space out there for people to use.

Now, if they had their own servers serving songs on their own bandwidth, then i would.

 

[NovaTerra]

With like, 5 BILLION FTP sites out there, why would you want Napster? Check out European sites and sites on the eastern rim for full album downloads.

Napster had so many things wrong with it, I was glad to see it &quot;die.&quot;

 

[kami]

no way, plenty of other FREE services out there.

 

[Emulex]

morpheus ownz

 

[ImBroken]

There will always be free music out there.. But I wouldnt mind paying a few bucks to download a couple of albums here &amp; there.. CD prices went totally out of control...

 

[Scabilian]

heck naw! i have other sources for free music. i just hope they dont get popular like CRnAPSTER

 

[MuffD]

NO! You can't even get anything there anymore!

 

[Jaimin]

Moralpanic is right, I heard on the news that the charge would be about $10 dollars a month and that you would be capped at about 70 downloads.

 

[daveman]

Maybe, but for now theres other sites you can get better service for free

 

[obiwaynekenobi]

<< no, not unless the &quot;OLD&quot; napster returns >>



I agree, I've not used napster in like 2 months because there isn't anything on it anymore

screw napster use Kazaa or WinMX

 

[HansXP]

Not a chance. Gnutella all the way