Slashdot Mirror
Slashback: Drives, Pods, OEMs
Drive-n to strong drink and harsh words. Kenneth Yu writes: "You might recall the overwhelming response to a recent 'Ask Slashdot' regarding the abnormally high failure rates of IBM 75GXP Hard drives, and the pulling of all 75GXP from Pair Networks' Servers. A class action lawsuit has been filed by Michael Granido, Jr., on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated. You can view the complaint in PDF format at http://www.sheller.com/IBM_complaint.pdf. This story was initially reported by Tech Report (http://www.tech-report.com)."
Apropos that, jriskin writes: "Storagereview.com has its new reliability database up and running. I have no affiliation with the site, but it only benifits the community to have as many people contribute as possible. The database is a listing of hard drives and whether or not they have failed, when they were purchased, etc. So get over there and put in all your HD data!" Things like this could help eliminate the anecdotal-only nature of many of hardware complaints, especially if people who are happy with their hardware bother to report it.
Falling far from a tree has nothing to do with it. Majik writes "A quick correction - the iPod has *10* gigs of storage, not 5 (or 6 like the Nomad). And with the Firewire interface you can move an entire CD in under a minute. Although I admit I was hoping for more out of the product announcement, it's still pretty darn cool ... "
On the other hand, jchristopher writes: "Love it or hate it, Apple's new iPod digital music player is here. Yesterday, many people commented that "at least it has no copy protection" and praised Apple's attitude toward digital music. Unfortunately, this may not be the case - according to this New York Times article, the iPod does indeed have copy protection - MP3 files copied to the iPod from one Mac to the iPod CAN'T be offloaded onto a different computer. Ouch!" That means (at least without further hacking) it can't be used as a transfer medium between the G3 and work and the iMac kept hidden in your darkest closet, which is sort of a shame considering that it has all the right things built in to be even better than the several portable firewire drives on the market.
Unorginal Equipment Makers. An Anonymous Coward writes: "This is a follow-up on a previous story posted to Slashdot about Microsoft's anti-competitive OEM contracts." It's a report by German journalist Erik Möller (hi, Erik!), who too an extremely thorough look at the details of OEM bundling deals, and what they mean to customers. Möller's conclusion: "No operating system will ever be able to compete with Microsoft Windows on the desktop market as long as OEMs cannot legally install it besides Windows without losing their license."
'Technical meaures' covers a pretty broad swath. Robotech_Master writes "The RIAA has responded to the 'license to virus' story, calling it a false Internet rumor and explaining their side of the story." So the RIAA officially does not want a license to hack, at least on paper.
Where'd you get that from? Look at the specs: 5GB hard disk drive.
From Apple's iPod Web page:
"Small though it is, iPod has a hefty 5GB hard disk drive."
As for transfering files, it is my understanding that in Idiot Mode (which Apple calls Default Mode), the iPod can only synch with one primary computer at a time. you can operate the device from within iTunes in non-idiot mode, which gives you more flexability.
What the iPod does is mirror the macintosh it's connected to. What that means is that if it's got the mp3s from one mac, they'll get overridden with the mp3s from the next mac you sync with.
However, if you use the iPod as a firewire disk, then you can copy files back & forth (including mp3s that you can play) with glee. They just wanted the RIAA off of their back, so now you have to (gasp) click and drag your files in order to copy them.. It's called "manually copying" the files...
Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
or are you just happy to see me? ;-)
If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
There is no legal way to act anti-competitively when you define anti-competitive to mean "illegal".
The government can, and does, impose anti-competitive tariffs and have it still be legal. Congressmen can, and do, give targeted anti-competitive breaks to companies and it is still legal. Patents are legal, 17-year, permits to be anti-competitive. Max, you have yet to define what "anti-competitive" means other than to say it is illegal and it is what Microsoft does.
That, my friend, is exactly what you would expect in a low transactional cost market. This is a market where the Cost of Goods sold is less than 0.1% of the product price. For sake of argument, zero transactional cost. Assume three potential companies start with equal shares of the market. Natural perturbations will cause them to become unequal. The one with the larger share will then have more money for advertising, research, etc. This will cause the share to increase even more. It is a positive feed-back loop.
You may not like anti-competitive effects of Marketing but it is very effective and it is legal. It is especially effective on the herd mentality that was brain-washed by a generation of TV commercials telling them that expensive Brand Name products are much better than low-cost alternatives.
Yes, it is very possible for a new, low transactional cost market to become dominated through legal means. Call it FUD, call it Vaporware, call it Marketing. In the United States, call it legal.
Did Microsoft violate Section 2? I think it did. It is virtually impossible to be a monopoly and not be guilty of maintaining a monopoly. But it may be possible monopolization is inevitable in this market. Even the DoJ lawyer didn't answer the Appellate Court question "We are going to replace one monopoly with another if you're right; right?"
One upset consumer was heard to say, "I read on some web site claiming to have apple insiders that their new digital device was going to be a fully digital electric car with handwriting recognition, 14 pci slots, and a breakfast buffet in the trunk. How dare Apple promise something so great and then deliver a simple mp3 player?"
Other people have complained about the price, feeling that even though the hard drive that powers the iPod costs $400 all by itself, Apple should've cut the price significantly so that their customers don't have to spend so much money. An stock analyst in an expensive suit told us, "I don't get it. Apple somehow managed to post a profit this past quarter, despite everyone else bleeding money and complaining how bad the economy is for computer makers. Where do they get the gall to not be losing millions of dollars?"
After this extreme disappointment, Apple watchers are all looking into the future, hoping for better results from their favorite company next time. Rumors of a levitating PDA that has voice recognition, does tarot card readings, and has wireless access that allows it to communicate with NASA's Cassini space probe have gotten everyone excited!
One time I threw a brick at a duck.
the following is copy and pasted from macintouch.com/ipod.html.
:::::
A lot of people are making the mistake that the iPOD is only and MP3 player.
First and foremost it is a 5 gig firewire drive with 32 megs of static ram, and input as well as output devices (scroll wheel, screen, etc...not sure if the definition of a computer has changed in the last day... but this thing is a lot better than the powermac i owned years ago).
Ok, very simply it is a slave device. Portable Open Database. You know it will have a calendar, clock and whatever apps apple ads or I myself when i understand the OS... aka palm sync. It will also contain a few games... i still use my original game boy and the screen is not much bigger. Everyone thinks this is only a music device... but this is what everyone needs and doesn't even know it.
Ever since Apple took away our floppy drives. I can now take my excel files, photos, mp3 files, cad files, i can even put OSX on it and boot my mac from it!!!!....or any frickin thing I want in my pocket!!!! Just imagine the possibilities... when I am outdoors with my digital camera i can store files on it or when i am in a conference room I can record my voice on the disk.
Why would Apple put such a large screen on there, why would Apple not once place the words music or mp3 player on the device... why is the file system capabilities of this thing so amazing... no one quite understands what this is... remember all those easter eggs that weren't allowed in 9.1 or X...well they are all in this baby... this is iPod, this is our portable little slave device that everyone will want when they realize what it can do...
Also see the Oct. 25 entries on the Mac Resource Page.
Portable firewire HD, sans music player, but:7 .h tml
/. meant that you could move 70 minutes of mp3s in under a minute, because to read 680 meg from a CD would require a read spead of 76x.
http://www.archos.com/us/products/product_50004
Archos has a 20 GB model, it is larger, but I would assume it would be faster- (I can't see having a 7200 RPM drive on an mp3 player, but IMBR), and $100 cheaper (search the net for a better price) for 2x the storage.
Also, it IS five gigabytes, unless apple.com's lying:
http://www.apple.com/ipod/specs.html
I would assume that the person who submitted the
--I hate people when they're not polite -"Psycho Killer", Talking Heads
thanks for posting the link. I can't say that my short report was really "thorough", since much of it is quotes from Hacker and Gassee, but that's partly because of its subject. Since the kind of OEM deals it discusses are certainly not frequent (and possibly organized in a clever contractual hierarchy), it is quite easy to cover them up.
But I think the evidence for their existence was already overwhelming before my own search (you don't have the CEO of a major competitor making such factual claims if there's nothing behind them), and at the point where one manufacturer told me quite straight-forwardly "Yes, we can't create dual-boot machines under our OEM contract, but please don't quote me on that" I decided to do what is called a cut in Prolog and not investigate further. It is really up to the anti-trust authorities now to subpoena these contracts and to then examine them in detail. If I am not mistaken, this was already done by the US regarding the "modification of icons on the desktop" question.
Interesting: In the K5 article, there were quite a few vocal Microsoft supporters who argued that this is a non-issue, either because the contracts don't exist or because they are not relevant -- in the attached poll, however, ~85% said that the OEM pratice should be investigated and quite possibly forbidden. So the silent majority seems to agree that this is a major issue.
Don't be fooled into passivity by a vocal minority: If you agree it's an issue, do something about it -- fax or write the EC in support of my report, or e-mail your own legislators (wherever you are, this seems to be an issue everywhere). Don't let MS get away with this.
Thanks,
Erik
Ok, Slashdot gets it wrong on the iPod again. Here's the deal, as can be found on MacFixIt. The iPod has two basic modes, the automatic music management system that syncs with iTunes, and a more manual sort of management method. It will only auto-sync with one "setup" of iTunes, meaning that you can't go to another computer and have it automatically copy all the music that the iPod has but the HD doesn't to the computer. However, you can manually transfer music files back and forth between the iPod and any compatible computer. This all, of course, totally ignores the other major functionality of the device as a plain-jane Firewire HD, which can be used to copy whatever you want between computers.
It's true, the iPod has only 5 billion bytes of storage capacity. Majik was smoking crack with timothy or something. Whatever. Now for the cool shtuff.
:)
What I have heard is that the drive in the iPod is none other than the Toshiba 5GB PC Card Hard Disk Drive, which itself is worthy of GadgetLust. Yep, that iPod's got a Type II PC Card slot in there, just waiting to be upgraded when Toshiba releases a 10-gigger (which probably won't be more than 6 months). If it's not a PC card drive, it's certainly the embedded version of the same drive, and hopefully will be eminently hackable. Here's to rumors, rumours, and the Apple stock I bought after the WTC bombings
"What's worse - we were accused of equating Internet piracy with terrorism. We may take Internet piracy seriously, but we're not insane."
Oh, I beg to differ... ;-)
"It's one thing to be criticized for what we do - that's fair game. But to be vilified for what we don't do - that's very disheartening."
Maybe if we vilify them even more, they'll be so disheartened that they'll give up! Wouldn't that be the day?
Aw Jeez.
The iPod has 5 GB of storage.
It also does not have any copy protection, but it won't auto-sync between two machines, you have to do it manually (just drag & drop the files).
Hope that clears things up just a little.
I tried to stay out of this, but the iPod bashing seems to continue.
- go-through-this-web-wizard and "we think you dropped it". Worse if you're outside the US. Sign me up for some iPod Applecare - after two dead Rios and two dead NJB's, I could use some warranty love.
a gain Creative Playcenter and you'll see what I mean.
Seems to be a lot of talk about the iPod being dead-in-the-water (or nearly so) as an MP3 player. I, as a NJB owner and occasional Apple owner (my G3 has been powered up twice in the past year), find the iPod quite appealing, and would gladly exchange my NJB plus two hundred dollars for one. Here's why the iPod will, IMHO, kick the NJB's butt.
#1 - Size. The NJB is exactly the wrong size, as are all the other HD-based MP3 players I've seen. Too big to be really carry-in-on-you portable, too small to hold a useable display or enough buttons to properly save/name playlists, manage files, explore your collection etc.
#2 - Data storage. The NJB didn't used to do this, and even now barely does.
#3 - Speed. USB. Slow. Firewire. Fast. Swapping out even a 6GB NJB MP3 library takes a LONG, LONG time, like many hours. Assuming the software doesn't time out on you, which, ten firmwares later, it still does. Often.
#4 - Reliability. PB5300s be damned, Apple makes decent stuff. I'm on my second NJB, and its starting to die too. Creative puts a *90-day* warranty on the things, they're so flaky. Really.
#5 - Battery life. The NJB gets 2 hours IME from a set of NiMH AAs. There are also issues with overheating, failure to charge, and improper charge status reporting on the units. What good is 1000 hours of music if you can only enjoy it two hours at a time? Many NJB owners are resorting to $50-$70 ratpacks worth of bulky NiMH D-cells to get to the 10hr battery life the iPod advertizes as standard. Bring on the lithium polymer.
#6 - Support. 1-800-SOS-APPL vs. we-wont-even-give-you-a-number-to-call-unless-you
#7 - Output level. Based on the Reg's comment about the iPod sounding good, and based on the fact that NJB owners everywhere are opening up their units (voiding their 90 day warranty) to try to solder in a reasonable output level.
#8 - Aesthetics. 'nuff said.
#9 - Price. The iPod is cheaper ($400USD) than the NJB was when I bought my first one at $759CAD ($499USD), less than a year ago. If this 1.8" drive format is standardized, then bigger drives should be able to be shoehorned in, as NJB owners have been doing.
#10 - Drive letter (or the mac version, mount-it-on-the-desktop) support. Try using cheeseball banner-ads-galore gotta-use-it-to-load-the-device-whoops-i-crashed-
#11 - Boot times. Even with the latest firmware, its still 20+ seconds from powering the unit up to getting a sound out of it. For those with bigger HDs, older firmware, or less-than-perfect ID3 tags, startup times of two minutes or more are the norm. I can't imagine the iPod would be worse than THAT.
#12 - Proprietary file system with no repair / diagnosis options. There's no way to do a "real" format on an NJB. As in one that actually looks for bad sectors. One bad sector on your fragile fujitsu 2.5" HD? Count on lockups, freezeups, and untold general annoyances. There's no defrag, either.
There's plenty more, but I think the point is made. 'nuff of the pooh-poohing. As soon as someone can get this thing to accept MP3s from a PeeCee running Windoze and/or Linux, it will be the next big thing. (and save the archos jukebox praise, unless you've actually used one - or at least fondled a dead one).
-- "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." (Charles Darwin)
Basically, the iPod can either play or transport files.
It can do both at the same time.
Files put into the player via iTunes synch cannot be removed back onto a computer...
Bzzt ... Yes they can. From the Apple faq
To transfer music between your computers, or to add songs to iPod from both systems, you can selectively drag and drop songs, albums, or playlists between iPod and either computer using the manual update mode.
Steve M
First of all, mp3 decoding is done through basically synthesising waves according to the (lossy) information being used, and outputting them as 16 bit 44.1K audio in the vast majority of cases.
mp3 audio is inherently lower quality than 16/44 (some other formats like WMA or 'mp3pro' are even more blatantly inaccurate, making up data out of the blue) and so, to my knowledge, the most common approach has been to just cast the resulting sample values to an int or something, which is the same as truncation of the value. This results in quantization distortion, and since it's just lousy mp3, who cares?
However, it is possible to decode mp3 to 24-bit resolution and up- and this is where it appears Apple's approach to these things gets interesting. My own experience with this started when I got iTunes running on a MacOS 8.6 system- before then, there was no chance of running iTunes, and I'd been using other means of playing mp3s, like SoundApp, which remains a nifty program but didn't prepare me for what I was going to hear from iTunes.
Briefly, I do audio mastering work, and have very high resolution audio gear coming off my Mac- and here's the deal- I started playing tunes off iTunes, and was very startled to hear them playing with a depth and dimensionality that I was totally unaccustomed to. The sound was more 3D than 2D, despite the mp3 sources. Why?
For a possible answer you might look here, at some tests done with 24-bit mp3 decoding libraries, and consider Apple's background in pro audio. Put simply, it's my suspicion that iTunes is decoding to 24 bit or 32-bit floating point, and dithering the result to 16 bits for the sound output DACs. This is a substantially more sophisticated approach than the usual 'mp3 is cheesy anyway' direct truncation, and it yields considerably better sound. I can't get direct confirmation of this by citing iTunes source, as iTunes is closed source- so I linked to a 24 bit decoder review page to drive home the point that this technology is out there and in use.
What does this have to do with iPod? Easy- what iTunes can do in software, iPod can do in embedded hardware. I think it would be a good idea to analyze the performance of iPod compared to other mp3 playing portables- and see whether iPod is pioneering high-resolution mp3 decoding and dithering in a portable. This can be measured: the noise floor will be different and up to 20 db lower compared to simple truncation! It is also likely to sound distinctly different as well- high-quality headphones might make this equally obvious.
Just thought I'd raise the issue, since the Register has apparently commented that it sounds nice, and I've had similar observations about iTunes... the _character_ of the improvement in sound is very much resolution domain stuff, and Winamp users can apparently get an example of this type of sound through a 24-bit MAD mp3 library plugin. If my hunch is correct, Apple are already routinely doing this in their products to get a more 'high-end' sound, including iPod- and it may be a first in mp3 portables. More research (by someone who _can_ just run out and buy a Nomad and an iPod and start measuring them ;) ) is indicated :)