I've never been able to figure out how it is that people who themselves have accomplished nothing of note in a given field feel safe in telling the market leaders in that field what they _must_ do to succeed. If I say that Microsoft will have to start paying better attention to me if they want this Office product of theirs to becomes the force in software it wants to be, everybody would get a good laugh and move on. The numbers tell the story.

But Arik Hesseldahl has a deadline to meet, and a column to fill. So in the most recent issue of Forbes, Arik writes More Suggestions For iTunes, and says, "First and foremost, if Apple is going to become the force in music sales it truly wants to be, it's going to have to start paying attention to the demands of sophisticated music listeners."

Online music sales isn't quite software, and 70% of the market isn't quite 95%, so — grandiose pronouncements notwithstanding — the question is whether or not the suggestions are any good.

The suggestions can be summarized as:

1. Include the liner notes for each album.
2. Use the date of the original recording for re-releases.
3. Set up email alerts for releases by certain artists.

I think that two out of three isn't bad.

In the first case, the author picks an older jazz album to demonstrate the lack of liner notes. It is true that Conversations With Myself lacks any liner notes whatsoever, but that doesn't mean that the iTunes Music Store can't handle them. Another BIll Evans album, Piano Player, demonstrates the capability, though the notes are not included in each song after you've downloaded it. Now we're getting down to details — should the entire liner notes be included in the comments for each song? Or, as is currently the case, should they simply be displayed on the album page so that people who are interested can save or make notes?

In the second case, as the author acknowledges, this is not an easy issue to resolve. Yes, some collectors might want to organize music by the data of its original release, and so that year would be more useful. Many re-releases are remastered at the same time, so other collectors might want to track the date of re-issue. More importantly, this isn't limited to the iTMS, but is part of the way the labels tag things. Amazon lists both dates, and when iTMS includes liner notes, they usually include the original release date. I happen to agree that songs should be marked with their original date of recording, and have spent a lot of time "fixing" albums on which Gracenote has automatically stamped a recent date. There may be contractual issues with this, but I vote in favor of this suggestion.

Finally, email alerts. Good idea, why not?

Frankly, the liner notes issue isn't going to go away. FLAC audio and other complaints are not likely to ever gain traction, but liner notes are an important part of the musical experience, and since iTunes 4.5 provides a way to automatically print very nice CD inserts, the issue of liner notes will only become more obvious with time. I just wish I knew the best way to handle them from a technical perspective.