Talk:Qtrax

message: So, with UMG, Warner, and EMI saying that Qtrax is making some false claims, is this even going to fly? bluemonq (talk) 06:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I can determine, no.  I'm pretty sure it's all been a big media hoax... possibly as a demonstration to the big four of the interest in the Qtrax service (maybe). It seems like a really weird way to gain leverage in negotiations. More about the failed launch and the big music companies comments on negotiations with Qtrax (or lack there of) here on a Slyck article Blissfulpain (talk) 02:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Is this going to go through?

message: Are there any details yet on file bitrate?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Exity (talk • contribs) 07:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In theory, if this were true P2P, it would have to depend on each individual user. bluemonq (talk) 22:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it depends on individual users, unless the individual users were responsible for buying the actual CD, ripping it, and then wrapping it in WMDRM. But that asks another question; is Qtrax ripping and protecting 25m+ tracks? I really wish there was some legitimate information on their Website instead of a pile of marketing copy.Smd 6710 (talk) 23:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Bitrate?

message: Its all an elaborate hoax.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.201.219 (talk) 12:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Pretty expensive one, then. They spent 500,000 pounds on the launch party at the Cannes.bluemonq (talk) 22:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like an investor scam. Research Brilliant Technologies. Start here: http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/default.aspx?cik=1054825 Smd 6710 (talk) 22:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. The only thing left that prevents me agreeing with you is that two of the large labels have stated that they *are* in negotiations with Qtrax. What's their cut? bluemonq (talk) 22:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Bluemonq, do you have a source for that statement? The latest news I have is that three of the big four have denied a solid agreement, with the fourth (Sony) being out of contact.Smd 6710 (talk) 23:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My source is the CNET article, which is [4] in the article. In it, it is stated that Warner and Universal don't have an agreement but that they were still negotiating at least until the 27th. It is somewhat ambiguous if they are still in negotiations. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt until someone explicitly says otherwise. I never claimed there was an agreement in place. bluemonq (talk) 23:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I see. "Negotiations" being the operative term. Negotiations could mean anything, good or bad. I'm with you, let's leave them with the benefit of the doubt. I find it a little puzzling, though, that these behemoth corporations would trust their assets with a little known company that popped up out of nowhere, with seemingly sketchy financial history, offering a golden solution. Smd 6710 (talk) 23:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The article by Wired I think was edited since the 26th or I completely misread like 3 paragraph yesterday. Anyways, he has quotes from the music companies involved about their negotiations Vs agreements. Wired didn't seem too happy about the conflicting information either. Blissfulpain (talk) 00:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have it installed at this very moment... still working on getting a song to play... they list 9 million available, but it's also asking for a login ID... check my Talk page for screenshots Blissfulpain (talk) 00:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Interesting. Definitely Songbird. Starting new talk thread on functionality and other questions I have.Smd 6710 (talk) 01:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I have to say, the whole thing seems very odd -- P2P that gives labels its cut? Does this mean it somehow filters only "correct" music? Can people retag and lie? Etc etc. Perhaps that's a bit off topic for the page, but...yeah, this whole thing confuses me. But anyway, stick to reporting the verifiable info, it doesn't really matter either way if it turns out to be a hoax, so long as we keep to WP policies (whew, steered it back). ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 23:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Very Off topic, but i think by P2P means thats users will download files put up by qtrax, and then upload them to other users wanting to download them, rather like the BBC iPlayer. CharlieDA (talk) 17:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Hoax

message: In America, 11:59:59 PM January 1 --> 12:00:00 AM January 2. Qtrax is American. Therefore, midnight January 28th EST has already passed. Midnight launch parties for electronics starts at at the same day as the day they are noted to be released, not the day after. Midnight movie releases on Xth day occur on Xth day, not X+1th day. Ergo, Qtrax is late. bluemonq (talk) 22:19, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: American Time Conventions

message: The midnight EST detail is correct. They mean 5am GMT on the 29th January so this is when it can expect to be downloaded.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.196.109.130 (talk) 12:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If that's true, that's pretty irritating. They should have said 12:01. bluemonq (talk) 17:00, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Just read the new CNET article. That's not true; original launch was the 28th. bluemonq (talk) 17:00, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, they've put out a press release stating that the service has already been launched and already have users. So unless they're writing from the future, at no point did they intend to launch it on the 29th. Read press release here: http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/prnewswire/NYM15428012008-1.htm  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluemonq (talk • contribs) 22:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Release date

message: It's based on the Songbird software: http://www.songbirdnest.com/node/2603 it will be interesting to see if they license it under the GPL or not --80.58.205.51 (talk) 13:30, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Client based on Songbird

message: Where are they from? US-American?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.56.182.4 (talk) 19:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Qtrax is based in New York City, so they are probably American.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluemonq (talk • contribs) 21:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Nationality

message: Just browsing through the available songs (downloads are disabled), it seems like track numbers are inconsistently listed on the search results page (at first it seems like they're just showing the number of results, but if you sort by another column heading, the arbitrary number stays associated with the same song), and some song lengths are listed as 0.00... looks like the teething problems may not only be with the business side of things. Thatjoekid (talk) 01:09, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Where are these songs coming from? I really wonder if Qtrax ripped and encoded 25 million songs, or if this service is just leveraging WMA (WMDRM) tracks that are floating around on some existing pirate network. I'm baffled by this whole thing.209.129.161.251 (talk) 02:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Song Metadata

message: What is the network back-end? Gnutella? Bittorrent? Can you shape the bandwidth characteristics? Has anyone been able to actually download a song off of it?Smd 6710 (talk) 01:17, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I created a temporary account with fake details... because... I just don't trust the site yet... but anyways, I CAN NOT find any way to play a song.  The confirmation email still proclaimed 25 million songs, while the display directly in the player lists only 9 million. Since I first opened it though the Users-logged-on counter has gone from 2054 (1 hour 3 minutes ago) to 3925 Blissfulpain (talk) 01:35, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Functionality

message: "These songs aren't stored in any Qtrax database--they're scanned from Gnutella, with false files and other nasties filtered via technology from MusicIP."  http://blogs.cnet.com/8301-13526_1-9859840-27.html
so, they want all the major labels to sign a deal that states that everyone could download free music from a p2p gnutella network ? why don't they make it without signing anything ? come on it's p2p ! 
that kinda doesn't make any sense.
:Perhaps because they don't want to be sued out of existence? Though the entire setup seems a little fishy. bluemonq (talk) 06:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's based on Gnutella 

message: in a 2 minutes search I found this official announcement by universal saying they have an agreement with qtrax, so I cant understand why somebody is telling they have no agreements
http://new.umusic.com/News.aspx?NewsId=465  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Garlor (talk • contribs) 16:49, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That announcement is from 2006 and was from a previous version of Qtrax, one which (I assume) didn't allow downloads. They would need to get permission again as they changed part of the deal. Alex G (talk) 03:00, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

text: That announcement is from 2006 and was from a previous version of Qtrax, one which (I assume) didn't allow downloads. They would need to get permission again as they changed part of the deal. <-- I didn't  think about this possibility, maybe they have an agreement which they can't use with the current version of software, anyway I'm a little confused about the website, theres an universalmusic.com and a umusic.com both seem to be official pages from same producers?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Garlor (talk • contribs) 13:45, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  they have an agreement with at least universal 

message: music.qtrax.com is currently just displaying a "Welcome to Oracle Application Server 10g" message (00:45 GTM) Thatjoekid (talk) 00:44, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  config error/database problems? 

message: I have a sneaking suspicion as I stated before, that their "botched" launch was in fact planned. I suspect to get them a better position at the bargaining table with the music labels, they had to demonstrate that they could get the traffic to depose iTunes and generate substantial advertising income. I present to you Brilliant Technologies Press release and "update" on Qtrax. The highlights:
*QTRAX is currently the no. 2 Internet site in www.alexa.com's Movers & Shakers with a reported increase of 15,000% in traffic.
*24,833,145 ad impressions were served in 6 days.
*As of today, approximately 60,000 users are using the application at any given moment.
So, I think they did it to prove to the labels which they were in the process of negotiating with, that they have a viable business model. Blissfulpain (talk) 08:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, you have a strong point. Could this also mean that the inability to download songs because of "initial technical issues" due to "overwhelming response" have some truth behind it? They would need one hell of a server to handle all the traffic. Alex G (talk) 09:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversy

message: :Image:Qtrax.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Qtrax.gif

message: Does anyone have any information on the other ad supported services? I have been hearing that Phil CollinsWas planning to launch one. We could use them as comparsions.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdulha (talk • contribs) 10:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: SpiralFrog perhaps? Alex G (talk) 07:48, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Other services

message: Apart from the "Hello Hong Kong" album by "The Kicks", does anybody know of any other songs that can be downloaded from QTrax?  I know that in the article it states that "As of late February 2008, some songs became available to download on Qtrax. The songs are all by bands who belong to TVT Records, such as Sevendust, Ying Yang Twins and New Year's Day", but I haven't been able to find any of these.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.167.193.198 (talk) 06:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Available Songs 

message: First off, sorry if i'm not editing this correctly as it is my first time, However, when are international downloads expected to work? 'Sometime in the future' and similar statements are rather vague. What general time period are we talking in? Weeks? Months (hopefully not years)?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.14.74 (talk) 09:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: International Downloads

message: For at least 10 days the website is not accessible at all (in Australia, although I am unsure about other countries) by multiple domains (www.qtrax.com, music.qtrax.com).
Anybody else experiencing this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjschrissouth (talk • contribs) 19:21, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Website Unavailable 

message: Seem to me like someone from Qtrax is trying to give a positive spin by removing all the bad stuff and putting mostly corperate fluff, so I've reverted twice (someone else reverted the first time). As I don't wish to get into 3RR issues, anyone else care to chime in on what we should do here? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 20:06, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, so I for now reverted back to the way the page was before the apparent COI account started changing. I tossed up a note on the COI board (Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#User:Leastway_and_Qtrax), but noone's responded to it. It DOES look like there may be some good info in there, but I for one can't separate the wheat from the chaff (sic?) as the term goes. From what I can tell, the topic IS notable (there are plenty of RSs, at least in this revision), so the speedy for sure wasn't warranted. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 04:11, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The recent changes... 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Qtrax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080503021152/http://qtrax.com:80/US/legal.html to http://qtrax.com/US/legal.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080128155425/http://www.nypost.com:80/seven/06252007/business/file_haring_business_peter_lauria.htm to http://www.nypost.com/seven/06252007/business/file_haring_business_peter_lauria.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091015155747/http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article3264556.ece to http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article3264556.ece
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:50, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Qtrax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110411075222/http://smarthouse.com.au/iPods_And_Portable_Players/Music_Download_Sites/U7B3P5K8?page=1 to http://smarthouse.com.au/iPods_And_Portable_Players/Music_Download_Sites/U7B3P5K8?page=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080128155810/http://blog.wired.com:80/music/2008/01/major-labels-al.html to http://blog.wired.com/music/2008/01/major-labels-al.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:29, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified