Slashdot Mirror
Apple Shuns DRM Efforts So Far
Graff writes "This was found on SiliconValley.com. In an article for the Mercury News, Dan Gillmor talks about how Apple is still standing firm against the Digital Rights Management (DRM) efforts which the entertainment industry is trying to force on the public. There's also another article on the fight for our digital rights in Congress."
As they should be. Finally a company with balls.
Apple knows that as the little guy they have to actually make their users happy. DRM doesn't make for happy users, but "Rip, Mix, Burn" commercials do.
"Then, one day, I tried to burn a mix CD on my PC, and it wouldn't let me. That's when I bought an Apple."
Seriously, though, that's the best argument I've heard so far to buy a Mac.
Well, their motto is 'Think Different'. Guess they really mean it.
Finally, well, if Apple pisses the studios off enough, we will see some OTHER brand of computer in the movies besides Apple!
;-)
Yes, I know about the "guest appearances" of SGI in "Twister" and others, but this may lead to more "reality" in my action movies. Like using a Cpmpaq to upload a virus to aliens
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
I don't see the point of this article. Macs are so overpriced. You can support digital freedom much cheaper with a crappy PC with more mouse buttons. I don't like the way Steve Jobs parts his hair. Apple needs to port their digital rights management-shunning to Intel please.
no, it has to do w/iPod. It's business. It's not about making the public care for them more.
I am SURE other MP3/Ogg player manus are REALLy thrilled about DRM.
Remember that Microsoft is the one that A) voted AGAINST legislation for DRM and B) has opted to make it a consumer choice as to whethor or not you want Windows to boot in "DRM" mode or not. If you're not in DRM mode, you simply can't play purchased digial music. Big deal - I'm not buying crippled music. However, you can still play all of your "insecure" MP3's and WMA's.
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
I think Dan Gillmor is missing the point. DRM
is coming -- it's too useful not to catch on.
The question is not will we be able to resist
DRM, but rather, who will be empowered by it?
With the right laws, the answer could be "the
public". It will be hard to get the right laws,
given the evil influences of Microsoft and the
entertainment industry, but it's not a physical
or moral impossibility.
Ben "You have your mind on computers, it seems."
If people can't use their hardware without implicit permission won't they move to other solutions that fit their needs? Steve says, "Mmmmmm, marketshare."
now if only a few other companies with a little weight would join apple on this stance.
you probably shouldn't have read this.
... to see the day when (non-IT) people say, "You're running Windows?! Why would you want that? You can't do anything with that!"
What's that smell? Ah, that's my karma burning...
It took long enough, but it looks like the people at Apple might have a clue!
... great move!
...
First, OS X
Now, they are telling the DRM to shove it! My God, a company that actually listens to what their customers want
What's next, bateries included?????
HallmarkOrnaments.Com
I have always wondered what Pixar's stance on this is. Jobs is one of Pixar's head guys, but they are owned by Disney.
if you aren't associated with drm, then those intelligent users will side with you. and since most computer illiterate folk have a tendancy to ask their intelligent friends about what computer they should buy, its kind of a chain reaction.
however, good things don't last forever. someday someone will convince apple to comply, through funding or by law. hopefully this won't happen though, and drm will be thrown out, like windows 95.
Considering that a significant portion already are and the way things are moving -- I'd definitely agree.
One of these two things will happen:
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
I'm pretty sure Linus, et. al. aren't going to implement DRM in Linux. Any DRM solution would require that it be software supported, otherwise how would a processor know the difference between ( MOV $data, %eax ) for my database app, and ( MOV $data, %eax ) for my mp3 system?
I want my rights back. I was actually using them when our government stole them after 9/11.
There's also another article on the fight for our digital rights in Congress.
You gotta fight... for our digital rights... in Connnnnn-gress!
TheFrood
If you say "I'll probably get modded down for this..." then I will mod you down.
Trust.
Intel, AMD, and Microsoft basically believe that we are untrustworthy until proven trustworthy. Even when we prove it, it's only for that exchange.
Apple believes their customers are trustworthy.
Which company would you rather do business with?
Mox
My thoughts exactly. This kind of thing could put Apple's sweet movie placement deals in jeopary. Maybe Tom Cruise will have a Zaurus in M.I. 3....
m00.
The thought that Microsoft "voted" for or against any legislation at all is kind of unnerving. I thought that's what we had legislators for.
Sitting on my desk next to the computer I'm on(my company Dell laptop) is a brand new PowerBook. Impulse buy, really... one I can't really afford, but oh well.
This is just another confirmation that I made the right decision. And heck, more and more games are coming out for Mac, too! I should have waited a few weeks, though, when they are planning on upgrading their models. Everyone else should take note of that.
Looking at the prices, they aren't as bad as I had thought. The features on the PowerBook I got are expensive on PC laptops, too. You get what you pay for.
The only bad thing is Apple's tendency to try to lock you in. They're open about many things, but they can be bad about pushing their own bundled applications. On the other hand, they don't purposefully break things(with the exception of Dock extensions, which is an annoyance) or try to STOP you from running your choice of software.
- Free tabletop fantasy gaming! Grey Lotus
For someone with a five-digit UID, you are pretty fucking stupid.
I used the term loosely. Essentially, Microsoft, IBM, Apple, and a few other industry heavyweights got together to lobby against government enforced DRM.
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
This is probably the best reason I can think of to get MS users to leave the platform.... I've been a longtime x86 user, and if it wasn't for BSD this would be enough to get me to switch to Mac :-P
;)
Um... but mac still sucks... the fact that I haven't used it since school in 1991 is meaningless, the OS has to suck....
If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
Well, when they drop the intel processor into the new MAC this will all be history. Perhaps this is the plan all along while they make you think you are free. What a scam.
Pixar is publically traded, and Jobs is the chairman and CEO. I'm not sure if Disney has any investment in the company other than a contract to distribute movies made by Pixar. And it's a great contract, too. Jobs got them to split everything 50/50, an UNHEARD of deal. Steve is widely praised in the Hollywood machine for getting Disney to go along with this deal.
"You're getting brutal, Sark. Brutal and needlessly sadistic."
"Thank you, Master Control"
-Sark and the MCP
That was worded inprecisely. It should have read 'Microsoft's Senators and Represnetatives' instead. Unfortunatly they're up against Senator Disney and Representative Sony.
I read the internet for the articles.
Should DRM become so bad that users can't do some of the most basic actions that would fall under fair use, I really think Apple would be missing a major opportunity if they did not start advertising their lack of DRM. As long as Joe Average knows that not every platform restricts you in such a way, there will be a strong temptation to switch.
:)
"Step 1: Insert CD
Step 2: Click import
Step 3: There is no step 3..."
Like I said in one of the previous articles, I think that the only way Apple would include DRM is if they become legally required to, or are forced into a situation by the entertainment industry that could cut Apple's users out of the picture...that is if they were to only release material in a DRM approved format. Now I know that there would be computer saavy folk who can work around the DRM, but Apple's average user won't. (heh, unless that simply requires a magic marker)
Regards,
Sean
You gotta fight... for our digital rights... in Connnnnn-gress!
Uhm, that "our" throws off the line's rhythm; as it stands now that line has one syllable more than the original: You gotta fight... for your right... to paaaaaaaar-tyyyyy! Now, if you changed it to "for digital rights" then you'd stay with the beat without losing your meaning.
Apple is setting themselves up as the computer to own if you want to work with multimedia, and installing DRM (which restricts fair use on a host of multimedia types) gets in the way of that vision.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
I suppose I'm glad that Apple isn't implementing DRM into their products, but this is simply a strategic business move, not some brave defense of our rights. Believe me, if they stood to benefit financially from DRM, it would be there (and very may well be in the future).
Before we all have to endure the ensuing "Apple cares about us!" and "Yay for Apple!" posts, just remember that Apple does not equal freedom. Free, open source software does.
Apple, Inc. does not care about you or I, in fact, no ones gives a shit about you or I, so take control yourself by using, developing for, and advancing Linux. If you don't like having others make your choices, start making your own.
Thank you Apple.
sulli
RTFJ.
One day Apple is lauded for bringing unix to the masses.
The next they're hated for keeping Aqua closed.
A week later, they're lauded once again for making development tools free.
Then they're hated for pushing specific look and feel.
They're loved again for ignoring DRM pressure.
But only a day before, they're scoffed at for keeping people out of the GUI cusstomization business.
And to top it all off, they're even disliked for having a monopoly in their own segment.
Either Apple doesn't know what one hand is doing while the other isn't looking, or we're a bunch of really fickle damn people. With me, it's come down to a comparison between Apple, Microsoft and Linux on the areas of usability, who has whose best interests in mind, and price.
Apple is by far the most usable. Bar none. Linux may have more uses, and Microsoft owns the market. But neither Linux or Microsoft actually seem to develop intuitive interfaces and software that Just Works.
Apple is only slightly more expensive than a comparable PC. Your typical linux box is kludged together from parts and duct tape, or built significantly cheaper from new parts. Linux wins this hands down, but is it enough?
But the real key is the question of who has whose best interests in mind. There's no debating the fact that Bill Gates wants your first born. MS EULAs are so easy to find fault with that it's become a hobby here. Microsoft wants to control your computer and accepts no responsibility when things break. Linux is all about freedom, your software, your gear, your control. Great in theory, but things just -break- on Linux as soon as you start installing post-distribution software unless IT is your life. Great for professional IT guys, but Linux seems to continue failing to make mom and dad comfortable.
Steve Jobs on the other hand, is a very odd type. He wants things his way, but he's utterly convinced it's' because it's better for everyone else. And oddly enough, he's usually not too far off. Apple makes their entire reputation based on making the system something anyone can get into and take the reins of. With XServe, they're on track to some badly needed credibility in the IT segment. They might be a scary monopolistic bunch in some pretty noticable ways, but despite it, they've got the best system for anyone.
I wish I were of enough stature to suggest a truce. I'd suggest this. Apple should open up the interface for a bit more customization, expose the API's and maybe work in some kind of X11/Aqua hybrid feature so X11 applications can run on Aqua without extensive modification to the Aqua look and feel. In exchange for this, Open Source advocates can shut up about how Apple isn't entirely Open Source, and accept the fact that Apple's survival counts on them having the exclusive control of their own interface.
Sound fair?
My own pointless vanity vintage computing page
"Apple is for Homosexuals" post
or
"It only comes with a one button mouse LOLLOLO!@!!11!!"
Wtf? A pig just flew past my window...
I like big butts and I cannot lie.
Huh? Isn't this the thread on satellite Internet?
--- Jason Olshefsky
Karma: Poser (mostly affected by adding this line long after everyone else did)
Yay Microsoft.
Seriously, though, the notion that Palladium is okay because you're not forced into booting into it is a joke. Microsoft built a billion-dollar industry by understanding that there are many kinds of forces, and some of the most powerful are market forces.
Once a large installed TCPA compliant processor base exists, you're going to find yourself forced into booting into Palladium mode because you won't be able to access the content you need without it. Your boss will send you e-mail, for instance, which will only be able to be read in Palladium mode. So you'll have to boot into it. Microsoft knows this. Microsoft is counting on it.
That's why it's so important that we refuse to upgrade to TCPA chips. We know from the DivX debacle that consumers have the ability to reject bad choices. We need to draw the same kind of line in the sand with TCPA chips. If AMD and Intel take a massive economic hit on the Trusted Computing architecture, they'll reject it. My fear is that a shallow understanding of the Palladium future by consumers + naive, buzzword-driven purchasing by PHBs will enable Trusted Computing to establish a market foothold. The battle lines are being drawn and I think we have a lot of work to do.
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
I hate to flamebait, but I don't think there's any other way of saying this...
To everyone who thinks Apple is "sticking up for your rights" or some crap: Get a clue.
This is purely marketing - Apple doesn't "believe" in anything any more than any other company. Given the chance, Apple would introduce the "friendly fascism" of DRM just the same as Microsoft has been doing. The only difference is that Apple can't *afford* to alienate their users in this way, whereas Microsoft is able to piss off a lot more people at once and get away with it.
Don't drink the Apple kool aid and believe that they're doing anything with your rights in mind. Buy an Apple because you love Aqua, or because you like OS X's mainstream application support, but with the ability to whip open tcsh when you feel the need. But don't buy their stuff because you think they're doing your rights any good. If they do so, it's incidental, and precarious at best.
If you're interested in your rights, go install Debian and only use Vorbis for your music. Yeah, you don't get Aqua, but at least you can be true to yourself. ([plug]and in all, while not as pretty as Aqua, GNOME 2 is pretty damn nice, usability-wise[/plug]) Otherwise, get an OS X box and be happy, but be happy with it for honest reasons.
The Free desktop that Just Works
Apple is a company that only looks out for number one. It only cares about itself. Sometimes it works out negatively, other times it works out for the better (for us). I wouldn't cheer for Apple about this, but just be glad the company is as stubborn as it is. BTW, I'm a 10+ year Mac user and current Mac/PC admin, so I'm not a PC troll or Mac troll.
Uhm, that "our" throws off the line's rhythm; as it stands now that line has one syllable more than the original: You gotta fight... for your right... to paaaaaaaar-tyyyyy! Now, if you changed it to "for digital rights" then you'd stay with the beat without losing your meaning.
Well, no, because "for digital rights" is still five syllables, whereas "for your right" is only three. Also, I was trying to stay as close to the quote in the article as possible. It's a tradeoff either way, but I didn't think there was enough to be gained by tossing out the "our". Appreciate the feedback, though.
TheFrood
If you say "I'll probably get modded down for this..." then I will mod you down.
Dan Gillmor, Victor Nemachek (from El Gato, makers of the OSX PVR eyeTV), JD Lasica (a journo working on a book on fair use), Tim "O'Reilly" O'Reilly and I (from EFF) did a panel on fair use, DRM, and the digital hub at O'Reilly's OS X con in Santa Clara yesterday. Glenn "802.11b Networking News" Fleishman blogged a transcript of the panel here,with lots more depth on the subject.
Minor correction. That's why MICROSOFT has legislators.
Disney has a 5% ownership stake in PIXAR as part of the 5 picture deal.
And yes after Toy Story the 95%/5% sales proceeds for Movies stubs and merchandise that once was in Disney's favor was renegotiated to a 50%/50% split.
Steve learned one thing. Once you own the majority company stake never give it up.
I've figured out why Joe-consumer does not use GPG for email, and probably a good reason why Apple is avoiding DRM: consumers don't understand security keys and encryption and such. It saves Apple money when customers aren't calling wondering why their MP3s suddenly stopped working, just because they put them on a different disk or had to reinstall part of the OS.
So we, as developers, need to figure out a way for the public to understand encryption for email security purposes, but keep digital media-reletated encryption confusing as hell!
Apple's real business is selling Macs, the iPod is simply a Mac accessory. They hope that cool toys like the iPod will sell more Macs. Of course, they make some money on the iPod itself, but not compared to selling computers. If DRM was good for their computer business they would dump the iPod faster than you could say "Newton."
They want people to see the Mac as the platform for folks who are making their own cool mix CDs, and that are making their own movies. DRM would put kinks in these kinds of uses, and so Apple opposes DRM. Besides, they have seen the writing on the wall, a lot of people actually like getting on Kazaa (or whatever, I have never really gotten into P2P) and sharing music, videos, and other assorted files. For many people that is their primary reason for owning a computer. The last thing Apple wants is to be cut off from this market.
If DRM means I'll be able to watch first-run movies on my entertainment center in the peace and comfort of my own home (or my future friend with his Plasma or front projection display and Martin Logan speakers), then it doesn't sound like such a bad thing. Plus, my popcorn's better than the movie theater's.
On the other hand, I don't want DRM on my main PC. I should be allowed to archive all my CD's to mp3 (and later, DVD to mpeg-4) on the biggest hard drive I can find and share it all with every other computer in the house. This is perfectly legal under the "personal use" clause of the license agreements, but if DRM had its way even this wouldn't be allowed.
I can see a case for both sides of the issue. I'd like to see what DRM can do for me, but the possibility that it can take away my rights could make Digital "Rights" Management less than worthless.
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
no, it has to do w/iPod. It's business. It's not about making the public care for them more.
</i>
apple = business
Just when windows comes out with DRM.. apple should release OSX i86!
The combined impact of curiosity, DRM and fanaticism should establish an enouirmos presence. Heck other vendors could ship with OSC instead of windows.
AS far as i see it.. Mac is our only saviour now
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
err what OS company has stood up and said they want DRM ?!?! Wake up folks ONLY the hardware vendors have done that, evem M$ has agreed to make DRM optional, they are venal, greedy and immoral, but not stupid. One does not amass that much money being stupid. By ensuring the presence of DRM capabilities M$ keeps their large corporate customers, who are TERRIFIED of a law suit over pirated software or music or somthing even more trivial, while allowing it to be turned off they try and keep face with the consumer market. What is going to really HURT is when our IGNORANT LAWMAKERS decide (are payed to vote) to REQUIRE DRM. The big issue is the hardware vendors, AMD/INTEL who've both rolled over and played dead like good little doggies. Where are we going to get non-crippled parts and such ?? :(
Any Open Source hardware projects out there
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
As to the endless debate as to whether Mac vs. PC is cheaper, I say most of the debate is missing a major point and Apple is missing a market. My hardware cost for a PC running OS X would be essentially nothing, there are plenty of PCs to be had. As long as their OS only runs on their hardware, I face a steep cost to start with Mac OS, like most. Being able to run Mac OS on PC hardware would leave my entire expenditure available for software alone. While once a major issue, drivers for the diverse selection of PC hardware should not be as much of an issue with the Free Software community advanced as far as it has. Just use free source for the drivers and keep the remainder of the OS licensed software. If Apple released an SDK a zero cost, the community would probably port the drivers for them.
The list price of $130 for OS X is perhaps a little high but I am surprised to see a 'family' 5 count site license at $200 or $40 each. I have never seen anyone with five Macs in their home. Compared to PCs, seeing five Macs in a company setting is rare. Still, I don't recall Micro$oft offering a five seat Windoze license at a 66% discount. Price a five count license for OS X on PC hardware at $200 and see how many takers there are.
All my previous sigs now look like this one, I wish they were permanetly recorded when used.
Remember that Microsoft is the one that A) voted AGAINST legislation for DRM
Wow, I never realized that when people say "MS bought a seat in the Senate" that they meant it literally. Since when do they get to vote on laws?
If future chips and os's make it hard for people to watch movies and play music? Hardware is ahead of itself anyway. Chips and os's allow us to do those things right now, without DRM. Why would I ever buy hardware or software that I knew was going to restrict my usage?
offtopic? Moderators are not a terrible thing waste.
"Either Apple doesn't know what one hand is doing while the other isn't looking, or we're a bunch of really fickle damn people."
I'm with the latter. It' amazing. This thread, because it's vaguely pro-freedom (or pro-stealing) will have roughly 200 "Apple rules, I wish it ran on Intel, I'd buy OS X today" people. Yesterday's thread, because, despite being a giant non-issue, seemed to be about controlling people or limiting something, resulted in 500 "Apple sucks, they're just another monopoly. Kill them and bury them next to M$" posts.
Fickle fickle fickle. You know how it works? You pick a side and cast your lot with it. I picked Linux a few years ago, saw what I was missing, and returned to the Apple fold. Either make up your mind and commit or just stop bitching. That's how I see it. If you like Linux, do your best to make it better and promote it. Why do you care what Apple does? If you like Macs, say "ha, I don't have to worry about dumb MS licensing and crap" and be happy making iMovies and burning DVDs. That's really all there is to it.
There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
Max V.
NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
apple = business
No shit. Thank you, Captain Obvious
All of the things you described Apple as being criticized for are the same thing: Keeping the GUI closed. Just thought I'd point this out, since it doesn't strengthen your point any.
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
With the Apple ///, they started targeting non-technical users. They included larger amounts of RAM and mass storage(512K, 3 floppies, HD) able to run large applications(for the time). This continued with the Mac, which became a closed platfrom, with a relitively fixed GUI, aimed at consumer who wanted a tool to do general work. Developers complained.
This is related to DRM because DRM is not about helping the user, but of helping the content developer. Apple has no reason to want to make the computer harder to use to satisfy the needs of parties that aren't even customers.
Even if most of the market is Palladium, I think that Apple will continue to supply products to the 5% of the market that is willing to pay for quality.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
DRM and such in effect really create a different product line. One that is more constrained then what we all have come to understand is the highly versatile power of "computers".
Incorporating DRM and such constraining technology
is to create a lessor in versatility product line.
There is a real and notable difference in such product lines. The DRM being closer to a consumer appliance then a computer.
It is outright FRAUD being directed at the consumers to deceive the consumers into thinking these two different product lines are one and the same, which they are in fact not.
Further more it is slanderious, libelious and inherently defamation of consumer character to base the proved false need for the incorporation of such constraning technology on the false claim that consumers are theives.
I have no problem with hose who want to create and sell such a product line inclusive of DRM and such. Nor do I have a problem with those who produce works only accessable by such DRM oriented devices.
What I have a problem with is the very clear intent to subvert consumer choice and free enterprise thru acts of deception and collusion on the part of industry and Government.
There are now two clearly different product lines.
One constrained by DRM based and like technology and the other not.
Knowing this is the first step towards properly addressing the deceivers and colluders.
And has anyone forgotten how Apple called in the FBI on Skylarov? What happened to the mass boycott of Apple stuff?? Come on people, don't forget - Remember!
There's actually a pretty big difference between keeping it closed as in "No source code to Aqua at all." and keeping it restricted as in "No adding functionality through the use of API's."
People here have traditionally bitched about the source being closed, the API issue was only really mentioned here yesterday.
My own pointless vanity vintage computing page
The day CD-DA disappears because "everyone" has magically switched to Windows Media, I will eat my hat.
Decades ago, in a letter to the editor of a local newspaper: "The day mass-market vinyl disappears because 'everyone' has magically switched to this new 'Compact Disc Digital Audio', I will eat my hat."
Will I retire or break 10K?
"And to top it all off, they're even disliked for having a monopoly in their own segment. "
what monopoly?
why is apples survivla based on keeping its API's closed?
serious, I want to know.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
... Palladium is cracked. I mean the music/video/software has to be decrypted before it's used. What prevents me to create a MP3 accessing it directly from the memory?
On the other hand I think that if MS can finally find a way of preventing pirating of their software it will be their end. At the moment Microsoft rules the OS and Software market due to their large user base. I don't know the numbers but I guess a big part of that user base use pirated Windows. If they can finally stop it they will lose a great number of users to free OS's like Linux and developers will finally be able to choose what their target OS is.
By not having DRM, they'll keep their customers and get new ones.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
But if you're happy with a DRM OS and a DRM P4, you can still play your "secure" MP3's... until the next DRS (Digital Rights Screwup) when you put in a new card or make an "unauthorized" copy.
That was Adobe, not Apple. Sklyarov cracked DRM on Adobe's e-book products.
One thing that I see that might change this is the simple fact that a large percentage of the media that is created and distributed is created and prepared for distribution on Macs. That might make a difference. Video is edited on Macs. Audio is mixed on Macs.
The United States and most European countries have already outlawed practice of medicine or law without a license from the government. They also regulate possession of some pharmaceutical or surgical tools. Then what happens if the United States government and the European Union government decide to outlaw practicing audiovisual engineering without a license? And what if professional audio and video tools are available only to licensed and bonded audiovisual engineers?
See also: "The Right to Read" by Richard M. Stallman
Will I retire or break 10K?
but it's pronounced Digital RESTRICTIONS Management.
I'm not sure who originated the term, I first saw it attributed to RMS.
Digital Rights Management is total Orwellian double-speak.
Absolute statements are never true
Remember how big a deal it was back in the days when Intel released their microprocessor serial number and everybody hated it (even though it would probabbly have brought more good to the world than palladium EVER would?) and they disabled it *BY*DEFAULT*?
that, my friend, is what i am hoping for with microsoft. we all know that palladium will be released regardless of what happens, but if we make enough impact for it to boot into the "insecure mode" (without too much bitching and whining) by default, we can have a good chance of killing it. all it needs is really some (okay, a lot of) bad publicity. the thing that did the intel trick was the "privacy" deal (even though, actually, it wasn't so much a big deal) -- being that Palladium has the potential to do THAT much harm, it makes you wonder why no newspaper has did any kind of real columns on it...
oh wait... you don't mean the newspaper (media) is ultimately the same group of people as the RIAA / MPAA (content providers)? outlook not so good, eh?
My life in the land of the rising sun.
You mean the same Microsoft that insists I activate my OS? And that won't let me make a full copy of the OS? Just trying making a full copy of a Windows XP installation (not the CD).. The OS will not let you copy certain files. Thanks!
Where can I get myself a senator?
"Can I keep him?"
"I don't know, he looks pretty hungry. Here, give him some booze."
Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
It's less expensive to build products without DRM. Less expensive to build generally means better profit margins.
It's unlikely Apple is taking this stance because it's the right thing to do. Assigning morals to a corporation is about as useful as assigning morals to a rock.
At the german elections 2 weeks ago, we had all our statistics sponsored by them. Yeah, right. .NET"
"This election brought to you by Microsoft
Knowing what's written in their EULAs makes me hope that our next chancellor won't be "remote administrated" by billg...
Considering that the hdd prices have dropped much more than the iPod prices have dropped, I would not be surprised at all to find out that the biggest earner of profits is the iPod.
they did just purchase more intellectual property rights to DRM patents. see this article: (http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/23/27352.htm l). so perhaps votes don't count so much as actions. and perhaps, these assets combined with m$'s ip in combining DRM into the os, is a sign that things could change should it become advantageous. apple might just have more of an understanding of what the users want, whereas m$ likely gives a sh1t so long as bill can become even richer. i believe that document says, "by the people," not "by bill or his representatives/senators."
you seem to believe that the people of the united states have some sort of power. did you forget about the exxon and companies war against iraq?
what? no DRM?
users rejoice and buy macs
suck it microsoft
my last sig was too controversial... now, a new and improved useless sig!
This presumes a smooth launch of Palladium and rapid customer uptake. That in turn presumes that Palladium itself isn't buggy, and that the whole industry has a massive driver signing party.
Much more likely in the near-to-middle term is that Palladium will come out with some number if, if not bugs, at least hardware/driver problems. In addition, the first DRM-enabled media will have problems. It's hard enough to launch a new technology *without* disablement technology in it, and the whole field of disablement is relatively new.
The old days of copy protected software are probably the best precedent, and they were rocky enough. I don't look for Palladium to have an easy launch, and I further expect one side-effect to be driving more users toward Macs. This depends, of course, on legislation, as well.
Since I was taken to task a while back, I have one (for the moment) question about Palladium. Does a Palladium boot need to be completely trusted or completely untrusted, or can it be mixed? For instance, if my video card doesn't have a Palladium-signed driver, can I still boot trusted and listen to DRM music?
I call Palladium disablement technology rather than enablement because the only thing it has added is a point of refusal. It is enabling only in that it lets me view/hear media that someone else would prefer to refuse, otherwise. But bits are bits, samples are samples, and in that respect it has added no new capability.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
In the end I have to agree that some form of DRM is necessary. So far this is laid out as a Goliath (RIAA, MPAA) against David (Lil ol' me). I think to understand this issue we also have to turn it around. Hypothetical Question:
If I'm (and I'm not) a little indy band working with my mac to cut some songs, can I hope to develop a working way to avoid going through the RIAA to release my material and make a living doing it? Since I'm not going to sell enough copies to cover a lot of theft can I make sure I get at least most of the money that these may generate.
Here is the stark choice: If I can't make a living doing this then I can it and sell insurance. I have less joy in my life and you don't get the fruits of my work.
Where are the answers that I need?
if( profit(apple + x86) >= profit(apple - DRM) )
{
++DRM
}
else
{
--DRM
}
// Not very elegant, but you get the point.
To begin with, you have absolutely no idea why Apple chooses to do this, or anything else. Or any other company, for that matter. There most certainly are corporations which have business practices which are derived from personal morals. But that's neither here nor there. Most of us don't give a rat's ass why company A is doing this, and why company B isn't. We, for the most part, simply care *that* they're doing this, or that they're *not* doing that.
In this instance, most users care *that* apple hardware/software allows them to use their digitial media in any way they choose. We also care very strongly that DRM enabled devices severly restrict what we can do with our digital information. We don't care about the philosophies behind that - we care about the physical reality in front of us.
This is fairly ridiculous.
Yes, Apple is a business. The business isn't there to make us happy and protect our rights. However, it does happen to believe that doing these two things is in the company's best financial interests. So they are doing great things such as this shunning of the DRM. Why does it make a difference if Apple is doing this out of love for humanity or because it just makes sense? It doesn't change the fact that it is a Good Thing, and seems to be a trend with Apple these days.
It's just like with legislation. If our Congressmen voted against DRM, I wouldn't care if it was purely out of the desire for votes in their next election and didn't care a whit about actually helping people. So long as they are motivated to do the best thing for the people.
If you found out some major app or utility for Linux was made by a programmer who didn't give a crap about freedom or rights, but just wanted to have that app for free (read: motivated by money), would you discourage people from using it?
If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. -- Carl Sagan
Well, as was mentioned in another thread, it was demonstrated that Apple isn't actually a Microsoft competitor in the broadest sense. Microsoft offers an OS, Apple an entire platform on different hardware guts. Some people see Apple as a monopoly on Apple equipment, which is oddly logical.
And the way Apple's survival depends on the GUI isn't just with the API's. They could open several of the API's without any real fallout, if they put the effort into making them as secure as they could. But the real selling point to an Apple machine is that they Just Work, and work the same. When you get into system customization on the level of Windows, let alone something like *nix, you start seeing problems with interoperability among the same platform. A context-click doesn't work the same because of X mod (WinZip), or a new menu is available from the menu bar (nVidia tray icons) because of Y mod, or the file saving dialog (GetRight) is different because of Z mod. Once you begin doing things like those, it makes support more of a hassle for the guy on the other end of the help line, and it runs the risk of breaking other areas of the OS itself.
Apple's entire reputation is "It Just Works" these days, and any application that breaks that reputation is bad for Apple. My compromise solution would be a small section of the menu bar reserved for extensions. Allow people some of that flexibility, but keep it constrained within a specific area of the interface so it doesn't interfere with Apple-designed tools.
My own pointless vanity vintage computing page
That's a good point. However, the iPod is basically a commodity device. Heck, it is basically just a hard drive. Apple isn't dumb enough to think that they aren't going to get serious competition in that market. iPod rip-offs have already appeared, and they will undoubtedly push down iPod prices much closer to the cost of components, probably in the near term.
Apple is very sensitive to both its own copyrights and such, remember the recycle/trash bin discussion and the lawsuits of the 1980s, but Apple was started by hardware freaks, and not software freaks. Steve knows the work-arounds are too easy, that's why Apple never really bothered with copy protected software in the first place.
Bill Gates is focused on software, and since the mid 1970s he has been obsessed with preventing programmers, uh, oops, consumers from copying his programs bootleg style.
This is a very old difference between these two camps. DVDs, CDs, digital media, whatever, for Steve it's all the same. Hardware has a much greater profit margin, and he wants to sell primarily hardware. See how much of the current i-Suite is bundled or downloadable free of charge?
It's to drive the sales of hardware units.
Sony and BMG have their own problems. BMG bought Napster to try to outrun this problem. But it's not Steve's problem.
Even for his Pixar films, he controls the rights to the lucrative movie theatre sales. Again, to really see a movie, you have to have a large screen and a popcorn machine. Bill doesn't work that angle, Steve does. Steve makes his money without worrying if some kid is going to copy his digital wares, because he has already turned his profits.
Let's not see Steve as an altruist, but simply someone who knows how to pick profitable models, that don't require unnatural market protections.
Remember, DRM is not only a pain in the @$$, but they will also have to raise taxes to reinforce it with police and the courts. FUN. ;-(
RIAA wants DRM precisely so they can shut out John Q. Garage band.
Why do you think the record companies hate music-swapping networks? These people aren't idiots, though they play them on TV; they know they make money when people hear music, like it and go buy albums. IMO, Napster didn't get killed because it allowed people to swap NSYNC tunes. It got killed because it was allowing musicians to distribute music without going through big labels. Obviously the labels wouldn't want to admit that, so they came up with this cover story about "piracy".
My favorite bands all encourage tape, CD and MP3 swapping among their fans (well, Tom Waits doesn't to my knowledge; the rest of my favorites do). Why? Because more people hearing their music = more people buying tickets to their shows, buying their commercial albums, and buying their T-shirts and other geedunk. Record labels don't like that because it takes away their power to "make" rock stars. DRM is designed to resecure that power.
Imagine this: the major labels get together and come up with a DRM scheme that lets you register to listen to their music online. You can't copy the music, and you can't share it with your friends. But the download is free; all you have to do is register and put up with the annoying spam that comes whenever you're entered into a marketing database. Sounds painless enough that most people wouldn't object; all they do is secure their media files with some kind of key that you get from registering with the studio.
However, before too long the major Media Player suites will *only* play properly secured content (again, in the name of fighting piracy -- the record execs will get on camera looking very hurt and say "we're giving the music away for free; we only ask that you register with us -- how cruel are you people?"). Once that happens, musicians who aren't signed by big labels can't distribute their music anymore. That's what the labels are after, not pay-per-listen msic.
All's true that is mistrusted
I see a necessity for this post since most people don't seem to realise what this is and what it is not. Some people take the acronym as thruth and assume it will enforce their rights online. It will NOT.
...
a) Microsoft WILL be able to bypass the restrictions and thus your rights will not be protected from them and their "partners". It will protect their "rights" against you (the quotation marks are there because market domination and forced obsolecence will surely be among the enforced "rights")
b) DRM is a technical solution to achieve MORE and STRICTER copyright law. According to microsoft's own site.
0) you will need a licence server to actually be able "transparently" protect files. This means the possibility of giving out licences over the web. (I wonder what other way they had in mind)
-> somehow i doubt they will support apache
-> the cost of a licence server is in the same ballpark as the datacenter server version of windows (NOT the consumer ballpark), so if you're an artist, you will most likely not be able to afford this
1) DRM will prevent resale of bought music.
2) DRM can make most music self destruct after a while, because you have supposedly agreed to that (note that you DO NOT get the choice to agree or not) at the present time, the clauses of the "contract" aren't even shown to the user. And it is ILLEGAL to bypass the contract (as in potential jail time if you record the music)
3) DRM does not allow you to play a file on another computer, an mp3 player or
4) DRM makes it possible for the licensor to revoke and change YOUR rights to your music AT ANY TIME FOR ANY REASON.
5) Because licenses and digital media files are stored separately, licensing terms can be changed on the server, without needing to redistribute or repackage the digital media file.
6) Windows Media Rights Manager "locks" digital media files with a license key to maintain content protection, even if these files are widely distributed. Each license is uniquely assigned to each computer.
CDs provide more functionality than vinyl. WMA provides less functionality than CDs. Why would anyone switch, given the cost? And don't tell me that it will be required by law, because if all those Discmen out there don't work people will scream. (Example: the utterly dead-on-the-vine HDTV.)
sulli
RTFJ.
I've stopped buying music for just this reason - I don't like to be treated like a thief. I'm not a thief - I used Napster to discover more music and bought more in '99 than in all my previous years. Since they've decided that their customers are thieves, I've stopped buying music. I've stopped downloading it too. I just refuse to participate in their crap anymore.
And this is why my next computer purchase will be an Apple. Besides the fact, of course, that they just work and have UNIX under the hood.
Go Apple.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Of course, it's business for Apple. They're a business.
The controversy surrounding DRM is political. Regardless of the side you take, your political allies will be few and far between if they have to first pass an ideological litmus test.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
This post will be filled with tangents -- bear with me. =)
I'm a big PC fan and I love Linux. This post made me really think and actually consider buying an Apple. What I want to see is options. When I can customize my desktop to the extent I can with GNOME, I'll start recommending it to folks. However, I'll still probably use Linux for 1) Game compatibility and 2) price.
I agree that Linux doesn't "just work", it does work most of the time. I put RH 7.3 with Ximian GNOME on a box and everything just works for me. No issues with word docs, no issues getting my browser and email to integrate with other apps... etc. I've got my parents and a family friend on Linux, and none of these people are "computer literate." I think the only thing they really need right now is easier installation and management of programs and files and more interoperation.
One of the things that gets me is that some folks arrogantly say Linux is so hard to use, but in fact they haven't touched it past a two year old version of Slackware or they only use Debian. Linux has been moving very fast in the past few years and it's starting to speed up even more. Ximian has been out for a while, I like it and I think it works well. A lot of people are collaborating well on interoperability and things are changing. Linux moves faster than proprietary stuff, so it's a fallacy to base your views of it without having used the stuff that's come out in the last 6 months.
As for Apple, I think the Slashdot readership is just that -- a group of readers. A bunch of different people. You can't call slashdotters fickle when there are overwhelming differences in opinion one day to the next -- some folks are just being quiet, some folks are speaking up and some folks are just expressing their views regarding individual issues with Apple separately.
As for my opinion, I say that Apple should move more towards OSS and prove that it's possible. Not all of their money is based on software, although I'll admit I have no figures. I would be behind them all the way, but they have the mantra that "What's good for Apple is good for you."
Default options are wonderful if you don't want to research configurations. But locking configs down is ridiculous, IMO.
~Dalcius
Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
was not intending to troll but I am not an apple user as tyou might have guessed, I keep forgetting they make, or at least brand much of thier own hardware. Do they actually manufacture it or is that 3rd party work ? I was under the impression motorola did most of the dirty work and apple just labeled it...Shows you what I know.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
"Of course, they make some money on the iPod itself, but not compared to selling computers."
The margins on the iPod are likely much higher than the ones on the PC because you can get away with higher margins at lower prices. A lot of people see a candy bar for a dollar and will pay for it, even if the candy bar takes 5 or 10 cents to make. That's a 100-200% markup. Most retail stores need a 50% markup over costs of merchandise to cover expenses of staff and make a nice profit as well (after all, if you're not turning a profit, you are going out of business soon).
The iPod has some plastic, a few chips, software, and a laptop HD. Total cost to Apple is probably 40 to 60% of the price of the device at the store because of their volume purchasing power. The store takes in maybe 10% of the price, the rest is divided between Apple and the company that ships things to stores.
Ever notice how the 10gb and 20gb models are only a little bit apart (compared to the 5gb and 10gb models)? That's because they could probably sell the 20gb model for very close to the price (if not the same price as) the 10gb model and still make a profit similar to that of the 5gb model. The extra cost to them of making it a 20gb drive instead of a 10gb drive is small enough that they want to make it look more attractive to buy the 20gb version, because they make ~99% of the price difference between it and the 10gb model straight into their pockets. That's why FastFood places will "supersize" meals as well -- an extra 5-10 cents of cola and fries to gain an extra 60 cents of money is a very smart thing to do if you want more in your margins.
What about computers? Computers aren't as simple, and the parts cost more overall. Most places have very, very slim margins and rely on economies of scale to give them a healthy profit margin. That is how Dell is so succesful(their margin is larger because you pay it all to them, with no $$ going to the stores or other middlemen). That's why VA systems got out of the computer hardware business --- teeny, tiny margins, even on server hardware. That's why Compaq and HP merged (slimmer margins mean more must be shipped). That is also why white-box computers flourish (speciality shops charge more, but give more in terms of selection and control). Electronics Boutique charges more than Wal-mart on games, but they have a much wider selection, and they will buy back used games (as well as sell used goods).
So keep in mind that the iPod is a very smart move for Apple, not just a Mac accessory designed to push their computers. Just because something costs more, doesn't mean they're making more.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
"I don't know, he looks pretty hungry. Here, give him some booze."
Heh, you must be from Massachusetts.
------
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
your point being what?
So tell me please why the above is off-topic? I am missing something here. I need help.
If Intel hardwires DRM into its chips, then slashdot users will not want Intel anymore. Assuming AMD does the same, then the only place left to run would be Apple. However, many have invested a lot of resources into Linux, and like OSS. Thus, they would want Apple hardware but a Linux OS.
Table-ized A.I.
It's called "humor", dipshit moderators.
MS would be strongly against a government mandated DRM system.
Why?
Simple, standards. If the government says how DRM will work then everyone will be able to write to that and have DRM. If MS gets to make their own DRM system they'll be able to ensure that only the companies they want can play along.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
I couldn't agree more regarding the Linux comments. It most definitely moves _fast_ and "it just works" stuff is really coming together with recent distros. I have no doubt that it will continue to do so considering the exponential growth rate.
Keep on, keeping on.
Just because Apple doesn't actively support altering of Aqua doesn't mean you can't, or for that matter, that it's not allowed.
DualityApple has pursued those who create an Aqua style theme for other computers because the LOOK and FEEL does belong to them. They paid artists and graphic designers to come up with it. Using it elsewhere is like using the Apple logo elsewhere, and Apple has the right to keep what's theirs theirs.
X11 already runs on Mac OS X, in the same screen space as Aqua (if your turn the option on), and personally I feel as though it's a Good Thing(TM) to have X11 not look like Aqua. After all, it ISN'T Aqua and thus I am made aware of the enviromental differences simply by observing what kind of window it is. If I'm the type of person who can't handle that, why am I running X11 in the first place?
XDarwinIf you're talking about doing screen drawing, Aqua is meerly the look and feel (interface philosophy, if you will), it doesn't HAVE an API. You may be thinking of Quartz, QuickDraw, and QuickTime, which are pretty extensively documented, as they always have been. For free, too. If you're intrested in what Aqua actually is, read the Aqua Human Interface Guidelines.
As for Aqua, anything you need to do to make Aqua windows/widgets when coding are there. Check out the Window Manger documentation, or the Cocoa flavor, if you liek that sort of thing ;-)
There are no "hidden APIs" (unlike M$ Windoze). There are however, system internal functions for performing tasks that need to be done (Window widgets, double buffering, etc), for which there is no need of programmer intervention.
Claiming those functions are a "hidden API" is like being pissed you can't call functions in a library because they where only implemented to assist the programmers while writing the library. In fact, that's exactly the same thing, isn't it? Hmmmmmm.....
This is one of the ways Apple is achieving greater system stability, through abstraction of the OS and hardware to the programmer. MacOS 9 (er..."Classic") was hacked to shreds by anyone and everyone, and there where all kinds of problems with INITs and CDEVs and such running amok on everyone's system. I have no less than 175 INITs and CDEVs on this machine right now (yes, a Classic box, 8600/250) and I use most of that functionality. The OS sometimes gets slow, sometimes crashes. A clean install of MacOS 9 will be damn quick and DAMN stable. Throw all this crazy hack-job business in the mix and it's easy to hose your whole system in no time. With Mac OS X, Apple has abstracted many things and it keeps programmers from being naughty and say, writing directly to WindowDef structures, which reside in system memory space. So should it be allowed? Imagine a loop with a bug which, under certian conditions, will write forever to that WindowPtr. Now remember it's in the system heap. Oops.
I can put it better with a quote from Super Troopers: "The less you knew, the less you could fuck up."CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
The RIAA says we are untrustworthy...
but the big five recording labels just got busted for price fixing this week.
It's like Reggie Jackson's great quote... "One's a born liar, the other's convicted."
Obviously you care for open source, and I agree with you that it's the most open and free expression of computing. But it's only as good as the input, and this includes not only the software, but the content.
You know? The stuff that you compute? The Data behind the Engine? The Soul behind the Algorithm.
It's easy to forget that in a general purpose computing world, the objective isn't to have the fastest hardware, or the most intuitive software, it's to apply these to doing
Free, Open Source, software doesn't eaqual freedom. It's just another part of the means by which we manipulate Data.
So support open source art. (i.e. Content) at LEAST as much as you support open source software.
unfortunately, most people really don't care. honestly, we're a thoughtful bunch, but if u go to the corner of say, times sq, and set up a booth asking people about this here's some of the likely responses you'll get:
1. "i don't care as long as i can watch/listen to my stuff"
2. "hmm, yah that sucks. but if i have to use it i will"
there's gonna have to be a major shift in the 'herd' mentality to actually think for itself and vote with the pocketbook.
i dunno, i'll fight it all the way, forever maybe, but realistically, people don't change and once something or someone is in power, unless it's life threatening, people won't rise up to change it.
i know, the spoil, huh?
we all know that palladium will be released regardless of what happens ...
:)
Yup, TCPA and Palladium are coming. But our goal isn't to stop their debut, it's to make TCPA chips a spectacular and expensive failure. We need to make the entire Trusted Computing architecture an albatross around the necks of AMD and Intel, one that they want to jettison as soon as possible.
if we make enough impact for it to boot into the "insecure mode" (without too much bitching and whining) by default, we can have a good chance of killing it.
I don't think so, and I think this is actually a damaging idea. You're focusing on software first, and that's bad. It assumes that we've already let TCPA get a foothold.
We need to prevent the adoption of TCPA chips by the general populace. This is the primary battleground. If enough people upgrade to chips capable of supporting the "Trusted Computing" model, Trusted Computing applications will gain momentum. It's those applications that will ultimately force users into booting into restricted mode (and staying there) in order to access content they need.
Palladium and other DRM/TrustedComputing code is a secondary fight.We want to encourage people to reject code that uses the Trusted Computing architecture, whether that's OS code or application code. But if we've prevented them from upgrading to TCPA chips in the first place, we don't need to worry about Palladium.
And I prefer the phrase "restriction-free" mode to "insecure" mode.
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
Not to be left behind, all the other distros made similar proclamations, except Debian, which is late and expected to follow suit sometime next year.
Pretty shortly, the OS/2 development team will make a similar announcement, as will the FreeBSD teams, as will the QNX team, as will that guy down the road who wrote his own OS in assembler.
Secondly, this is a non story. Apple HAVEN'T made an announcement! Incredible. I haven't made an announcement today either, can I get a story on slashdot? In fact, the ONLY people who have announced their intention to support DRM are the one company that do in fact have a monopoly and can therefore do such an unpopular thing.
Finally, all those people who've posted things like "Wow, Apple you are clearly sticking up for my rights, I'll buy a Mac" are talking rubbish. Apple are famous for abusing the legal system whenever it suits them. They are a corporation, and know all about legal pressure points. If it turns out that this mystical all encompassing DRM strategy isn't working because the pirates are using Macs, then the RIAA will have a quick chat with Jobs, who will see where his best interests lie, and bingo suddenly QuickTime has DRM.
There is in fact only 1 type of OS that will never have DRM, guaranteed. Say no more.
Mod parent up!!
Iff parent post is on-topic, then my name isn't Elwood P Dowd.
And it isn't.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
Only because they had their own version ready to go, which would give THEM control, not the government. Once you realise the potential of DRM, you begin to understand why these heavyweights want to control the keys (literally) at all cost.
The day CD-DA disappears because "everyone" has magically switched to Windows Media, I will eat my hat.
Sure, I mean this isn't the industry that forced us all to transition to LP's from 78's, or that convinced us to rebuy all our music on cassette after that, and then 20 years ago convinced us all to upgrade all our music to CD again. Is it?
Tried getting hold of any mainstream music on vinyl recently? Even cassettes are pretty hard to find now, and the sound and cassette assembly quality of pre-recorded cassettes is at an all-time low. Of course, you probably don't notice this, because chances are, you buy everything on CD.
The content industry has proved at least 3 times that it knows exactly how to get us all to upgrade our media formats, whether we like it or not: the transition from LP to cassette was in all sorts of ways a step backwards, but it still happened. Cassettes didn't last too long in the mainstream either, because they allowed you to record. The content providers pushed for a more desirable format, and up popped CD, which you could only copy to analogue cassette for the first 15 years of its life or so, significantly downgrading the quality.
Today we face a situation fairly similar to how things were in 1981 or thereabouts: a recordable, fairly open format (Then: cassette, Now: MP3/Ogg) is going mainstream, and is slowly killing off an older, more cumbersome, more expensive but arguably better-sounding format (Then: LP, Now: CD). The content industry is unhappy about this, because they feel that the recordability/copyability of the newer format is going to affect their bottom line. So they lobby for new laws in the US (Then: 1976 Copyright Act, Now: 1998 DMCA) to give them some legal standing, and to enable them to clamp down on those encouraging copying, and then they push for a new, virtually uncopyable format (Then: CD, Now: Windows Media/Palladium) with their technology partners (Then: Sony/Philips, Now: Microsoft/Intel/AMD). The new format has benefits for the consumer (Then: better sound quality and robustness, Now: no more trudging round music shops - entire catalogues available for easy download, all with pristine encoding and no blatant P2P spyware/stealware included).
The parallels are stark, and it only took 10 years for CD to dominate and for other formats to start dying, niche markets aside. If the content industry and Microsoft gets the marketing right, I fully expect exactly the same to happen with WM/Palladium - it will come to dominate in 10 years and CD will die.
The situation isn't entirely identical - the evolution of digital technology has made the stakes higher for both content provider (free P2P distribution is their worst nightmare) and consumer (breaking strong encryption on trusted systems seems a lot harder than simply waiting for recordable CD technology to become available and affordable). So you can expect much more of a battle than was the case with CDs. Nonetheless, I still expect the content industry to win this one - they are the ones with all the strings to pull. We don't have to let them walk all over us though - if we make noise now, we should be able to at least get some concessions towards fair use. If we shout loud enough, there is still the outside possibility that we can kill it dead.
However, if you simply sit tight and see what happens, maybe buying a Mac rather than a PC in a token gesture, then I hope you've got lube and an unwanted hat (not a red fedora by any chance?) because you'll be bending right over for the content industry and you'd better be hungry.
``If this bill were to pass, it would render ineffective, worthless and useless any protection measure we would have in place to protect a $100 million movie,'' Jack Valenti, president of the Motion Picture Association of America, said of the Lofgren bill. ``You could download a million movies a day, and no penalty for it.''
Somehow I doubt that I could download a million movies a day. But I would love to see what kind of internet connection he has!
maybe work in some kind of X11/Aqua hybrid feature so X11 applications can run on Aqua without extensive modification to the Aqua look and feel
XDarwin runs rootless. Oroburs (free like beer and freedom) provides an X window manager that feels like Aqua. Not sure what else they need to do.
Apple should open up the interface for a bit more customization, expose the API's and
Apple is actually against this right now. Their position on the APIs is that they don't want to expose APIs until they are sure they like the way things work. They intend to support documented APIs for many many years and so they are thinking very carefully about them and given that Aqua has only been a commercial product for 18 months its still quite immature and there are lots of changes planned over the next few years.
Quite simply Apple isn't ready to make Aqua's APIs totally open and manipulatable.
Apple knows that as the little guy they have to actually make their users happy. DRM doesn't make for happy users, but "Rip, Mix, Burn" commercials do.
:-)
Unless you "Rip, Mix, Burn" a MacOS X 10.2 Jaguar image, then you're a criminal right?
At least someone out there not willing to screw the consumer* (better known to the RIAA as pirates). I think that apple is more concerned with it's bottom line than freedoms. More consumers that buy macs create more, and make their own music/art/movies. I think DRM on a mac would be like a kick in the face from apple.
| - | - |
Sheesh, this guy is Insightful!
Comment about Apple is interesting, but this issue is presently dead in the water.
It is going nowhere in the Congress while the politicians play their games before the upcoming elections on an Iraq resolution, Home Defense, a few tax issues they have to get out of the way.
Info would have been better off to just focus on updating RE Apple and leaving out the non-news.
i was wondering the same thing when i was deciding on my next laptop purchase. you wanna know the site that put me over the edge and go apple?
www.macosxhints.com
im still a relative osX newbie, but this site has been great for all those kind of little tweaks i grew to love as a linux user.
but most of the time i dont have time for the fun little tweaks here and there. i want an OS that will do what i want it to do, and i want it fast. thats really where osX beats out linux, in my opinion. linux is just a beast to configure. im no huge expert on linux, but i did use it solely for 2 years. i just hated spending 6 hours trying to config samba so i could share files with the other dorm windows machines. never did get it working... and all the help i ever got from the community was basically rtfm, with no word on which manual that might be.
i really have enjoyed my switch. i cant imagine going back.
Sheesh, another Insightful one! Nice work, fellow AC.
XDarwin runs rootless after you compile it, configure it, and clutter up your harddrive with the jumble of things fink dumps in the arbitrary /sw foldere. My suggestion would be to include XDarwin-rootless with a basic WM that at least didn't clash with the appearance of Aqua as a default part of the interface that people are able to play with when they want to. Orobourous sounds like a good option. Make it a pre-compiled application available with the OS, optimized slightly by Apple, to take advantage of all the X11 software base. Apple could very easily do something like this with a clear disclaimer ''This advanced use of your Macintosh cannot be officially supported by Apple due to logistical reasons, please contact your application creator for assistance.''.
The last time I messed with Fink, I was astounded at how completely badly it seemed to screw up my system. Permissions got hosed, I lost track of what came with my OS and what was lumped in by Fink and wound up reformatting (something I'd been considering anyhow, which is why I didn't just do a fix permissions reboot) Fink Commander is a nice tool, but it's got a pretty major flaw - it asks you to reply to a console message that it -hides- before prompting you. Rather large problem.
Apple may not be completely ready to open the API's, and that's entirely reasonable of them to do. The unfortunate problem is that they are deliberately breaking other people's applications instead of just saying ''Look, we can't support this yet but give us some time.''
My own pointless vanity vintage computing page
Wasn't their ads a couple of years ago all about how you could "download and burn your own cd's"? They did it with a bunch of washed up music artist.
Apple has to wait at least 7 years for everyone to forget those ads, and hope some of those singers shuffle off their mortal coils, before they can support DRM's.
It will happen soon enough, unfortuanately.
You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
I believe Apple insisting that their GUI be a closed box is a good thing. There is documented interfaces, and the fact that the system design lets somebody reverse-engineer the undocumented interfaces does not mean that people should be allowed to use them. If they did this then Apple could never change the implementation because they would be forced to be compatable with stuff they never designed as a public interface.
Of course somebody should check that the Apple apps are not using the undocumented interfaces (I suspect they are not). If they are they can be acused of doing what MicroSoft was doing.
All those "A" companies kind of blend together, eh?
I'd moderate that as "Funny" if I had any points.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
what is the significance of "mass market" to a consumer in terms of vinyl records?
Let me express "mass market" quantitatively: Among albums that contain any of the top 40 popular songs for a given week in 2002, are 75 percent available on vinyl?
Will I retire or break 10K?
What Apple is really doing is sticking up for what Jobs believes in, which happes to be that DRM is a bad idea for consumers and for companies.
Some companies are basically giant extensions of a leaders personality. I would argue Apple is such a company, as is MS, as is Oracle, and to a lesser extent, Sun.
Your argument that Microsoft can "afford" to do this so they do, is silly. Why would any company do something if they knew it would hurt them? MS does it because Bill Gates believes in this stuff, just as Apple thinks it's stupid so they don't.
Just think of it as a giant war fought with huge robots ala Anime, except that the robots are replaced by companies. That's exactly what we are in the middle of, and you should be damn thankful that one of the giant robots is protecting the peasants instead of firing giant fricking lasers at the Barn of Rights where all the Animals of Freedom are housed.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Apple is a hardware manufacturer and not in the political busines. It may or may not be autoistic. They definatly can't be expected to keep up with all the finer ideosincracies of change so they tolerate people using a modified DVD player with their hardware, give a educated opinion on up coming legislation, and remind users that some changes will lead to higher prices.
Actually, you can make one copy for personal use and Apple doesn't have a problem with you.
It is the resale factor.
At least Apple seem to understand or atleast putting some thought into it before putting DRM in there products.
Music and movies are purely for entertainment, there isn't any interactivity. My question is, what makes the RIAA and MPAA think consumers are going to by something they can do even less with(when DRM is used).
Unless there's some way to trick Apple CD and DVD drives into not recognizing the media, then the CD's that won't play on Apples also won't play on CD players. You'll have to go out and buy a new Walkman or a new CD player for your home and/or car just to listen that new Britney CD. It ain't going to happen.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You can make X11 apps look like Aqua apps, but you'll never make them BEHAVE like Aqua apps.
Thus you will end up witht he WORST possible combination: Apps that look like Aqua which imply the Aqua behavior but instead behave like craptastic X11 apps.
Die X11, DIE
>80 column hard wrapped e-mail is not a sign of intelligent
>life
I am so glad to see that Apple is not falling for this, and taking a stand for the little guy. Microsoft tends to call their users theifs with activation, etc, but Apple adds a sence of trust to their users that they will do the right thing as long as they do not call their users theifs. I hope they do not go through with the Palladium technology too.
Sig: I stole this sig.
I wish the Aqua HI guidelines pointed out the proper behavior of the "Save" command. Currently there is no conformity. The behavior of this and similar commands depends what runtime object is used as the file primitive. Specifically if you use an FSRef or NSDocument it will behave one way, but if you use a POSIX file path it will behave another way. So for example TextEdit behaves differently than SimpleText or Sketch.
Oh well, one of the HI issues which blows over the head of every UNIX user.
>80 column hard wrapped e-mail is not a sign of intelligent
>life
>Apple, Inc. does not care about you or I, in fact, no ones gives a shit about you or I...
Apple does not care about you or me.
Get your nominatives and accusatives straightened out.
(Here's a tip: Instead of "you or I" / "you or me", just try "I" / "me" and see which sounds right, e.g., "Apple does not care about I" or "Apple does not care about me". The "you or" doesn't change the case.)
The parent should be modded up. MS doesn't care about end users, they're just sore that at least the RIAA has been dissing a their DRM solution for a long time. A mandated solution would end up being a solution open to all OS/system vendors and wouldn't make MS a red cent, and in fact could threaten their OS monopoly by giving an even foothold to other OSs in the realm of digital media.
An MS DRM solution would be unavailable or crippled on other platforms without hefty licensing fees.
Apparently, according to a ZDNet article a while ago, TV programs or movies recorded from television using the expensive and all powerful Media PC can not be played on any devices other than the PC itself! If this is their idea of DRM, I would never ever touch the fucking PC with MS technology.
If you are a developer, OS X is a dream platform for you: open and rock solid Unix core; best GUI on earth; free and best-of-breed programming / UI tools to let you build almost functional apps with virtually zero user code; gcc 3.1 and gdb for C/C++, Objective C/C++; latest Java, Perl, Ruby, Apache, etc; a loyal and intelligent user base that are willing to support and pay for great products - unlike the GNU/Linux community where nothing gets appreciated unless it's free and time has no value.
First off you can get X11 precompiled. In any case "fink install oroburus" will do the work for you. As for screwing up your system the whole point of using /sw was so that fink doesn't touch the Apple stuff.
As for Apple starting to bundle; while I support Fink Apple has started their own project called "Darwin ports" which is going to be like Fink except supported by Apple and thus "in the know" about future developments.
I couldn't buy an Ipac, and use it on both my work and home PCs, right? Don't they forbid you from shuttling music?
ostiguy
I have had no trouble with playing DVDs from my hard drive with both Intervideo WinDVD and Cyberlink PowerDVD.
Same caveat applies: You must decrypt it first. The Mac doesn't have much of an advantage here.
It has plenty of advantages DRM-wise in other arenas though. *coughcoughMSMediaPlayer9coughcough*
Even better: Rip the DVD to local DivX so you can take more than 1-2 on your trip. (I'll take the quality hit for the advantage of being able to store more than 1-2 movies on my HD.)
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
Yea, the whole UNIX core feels seperated as a whole, it's as if there is a good connection there but a slightly loose one... maybe this is one of the things Apple will address now that speed & functionality are up to par? Hope so :-\
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
"Apple should open up the interface for a bit more customization, expose the API's and maybe work in some kind of X11/Aqua hybrid feature so X11 applications can run on Aqua without extensive modification to the Aqua look and feel."
You should definitely have a look at wxWindows. A C++ environment that makes calls to the X11 architecture on almost every platform out there. Also, we all know about Qt, so I'm not sure about your statement. These development environments couldn't have been implemented without at least some documentation of the API...
The Death Penalty: Killing people to show others that killing people is wrong.
MS originally made its money b/c it jumped in and helped IBM to create the x86 based market. Now, they need a way to keep profits rising, the only way to do this is to force a new market to be created and force the old one to disapear (and of course control the new one).
-CPM
---You're all I need, When the water runs deep, You're all I need, Now I cry my soul to sleep -- Collective Soul, Needs
Look at Apple's flirtations with open source and you'll find the same phenomenon. Apple promotes Darwin and FreeBSD, which others develop, test, and debug for free, then wraps the open source components in proprietary code that can only be obtained by purchasing an expensive computer system from Apple.
Actually, that's from Dilbert, and the line was "He looks hungry. Do we have any bourbon?"
Nicotine free Amish .sig.
My Mac just doesn't work either.
Yeah, well you don't have to register Windows XP either. Of course, if you don't, it will eventually break and you won't be able to use it anymore. But it's good to pretend that MS is out there fighting for the digital rights of the little man. MS, our hero and savior. No control freaks those guys.
Palladium isn't about jpegs, picts, movies, etc... it's about controlling the types of software that can run on your computer.
If you publish information on a website it becomes 'public' meaning that you want everyone to see it. They don't have the right to copy it and do whatever they want to it, but that doesn't mean that they won't. The only way to stop them is to sue, or as you did, threaten to sue.
You can do all the things that you want to do with pictures now that you will be able to with Palladium. If you don't want everyone seeing your picture, encrypt it and send it to a friend.
Don't forget that if they can put it on their screen, then there is a way to copy it. Even if they have to take a picture (with a normal camera) of the screen to do it, since Palladium will probably stop screen shots. Hell, they can probably get a bit for bit copy now since you can output a digital signal to a LCD screen. All you would need is a device that can read the digital signal and copied it, then fed it back to the computer. It wouldn't be THAT hard.
Point is, no matter what you do to stop people from seeing your private data, there is a way to get it, so use the methods that we ALREADY have rather then sugesting that we need to buy all new hardware to protect our pictures from the nasty, nasty internet. Look at the X-Box if you want to see what Palladium is all about, MS wants to make the MS computer, which is fine if they still offered a normal OS that everyone could use.
If they continue down this path, then everyone will be using Linux/*BSD on normal PCs, while other people follow MS to the X-Box PC. Of course, Sony wants to beat MS to the punch and get all the home users on their Playstation Computer.
They are a hardware company. That happens to make its own operating system -- box sales of Mac OS X would not cover 4 years R&D. Take away the hardware business and they don't have the wherewithal to make money. Poof. no more Mac OS X.
gross negligence in both of the fields you mentioned (law, health care) can result in death. The same cannot (easily) be said about the A/V profession.
Almost every Hollywood movie requires stunt personnel. Gross negligence in stunts can result in death. Imagine if a Big Action Movie Explosion(tm) goes wrong.
Will I retire or break 10K?
OS X being available as an alternative on x86 would surely put a monkey wrench in the DRM conspiracy, and would give Apple more mindshare. Just what they need to drive more developer interest. If it were popular, they might have more clout with Intel and AMD to thwart DRM.
We have 3 here, an old iMac as a gateway and AirPort Base Station, an iBook and a Power Mac. The family license is a good deal. I would say that Mac people tend to be more honest and willing to pay for software they use.
Once you see the light of Mac and OS X, you just don't want to touch a PC. I got rid of my PC and Win XP a few months ago, and don't want to look back. We have everything we need on the Macs including MS Office, and they just work. All the machines are on 24/7 and keep running for weeks or months, they will go asleep when no used for a while and wake up in a fraction of a second. I have to shut down my PC every day - just too noisy, and it still crashes a few times a week.
Generally speaking, most PC users have a very crude and simplistic view when they talking about computers, all they care about is the list price, the clock speed or the size of hard drive. Mac users are more sophisticated in the sense that they consider the total cost of ownership, the build quality, the design, the style, the productivity as well as the performance.
A friend of mine has been a PC user for all these years up till 3 weeks ago when she bought an LCD iMac, and she just adored it, including little things like the bouncing icons, the genie effect, the smooth text, the shadow and transparency.
Long time lurker, first time poster...
Something that has always bugged me is the figure "5% of the market", when referring to the number of Macintosh computers out there.
I don't have any concrete urls to back myself up, but I know that this figure is pretty off-base. From what I've found, the 5% figure$
I used the term loosely. Essentially, Microsoft, IBM, Apple, and a few other industry heavyweights got together to lobby against government enforced DRM.
How in the world is this flaimbait?
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
Compared to user #616, probably. ;)
But no, I'm just a sarcastic SOB.
My own pointless vanity vintage computing page
However, making DRM mandatory in players and preventing non RIAA bands from creating DRM signed media is restraint of trade.
The point (that we say you've missed) is that if players only play DRM signed media, whoever controls the signing system decides who can distribute music. If your new ultra-cd player only plays DRM signed music, your favorite non-signed band won't be able to make cds compatible with it.
In order for DRM to work, players must only play DRM signed content. Otherwise, you could burn the music to a traditional easy-to-copy CD and rip it back into a non-DRM format.
The RIAA won't let you do that for two reasons. A) they actually don't want people copying their music. B) they do want to make it difficult for non-RIAA bands to distribute music. If you think that the DRM laws will be fair to non RIAA bands, ask a local musician if he ever recieved a penny from the piracy compensation tax on CD-Rs. He didn't, but the RIAA did.
t'nera semordnilap
There is something that sounds "bad" in my ears when I hear BIG! companies complain that $xxxx-million isn't enougt profit. It just sounds "strangly odd/un-logically odd" to me, IMO.
:)
If we look back, wayyy back, poor people with no money complained (I can understand that, they didn't have much/anything); now wealthy (_big_ pocketed) people complain that $xxx profit isn't enough.
They do what physicist just learn to accept, that in every reaction there will be some loss, shrug, blink, and accept; because there isn't anything anyone can do about it, absolutly anything, it's just one of these laws that exist.
Well, I'm not an apple user (as of yet), but they do sound better (in my ears), so maybe when Intel, AMD, and $ms have out-baned regular CPU, Os, maybe then I'll take a BIG bite of an apple
I don't claim I know more than I know, and if you know you know more than I know, then by all means, let me know.
Jesus, what the hell is wrong with you people? My comment was offtopic, not overrated. Can you do nothing right?
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
"But neither Linux or Microsoft actually seem to develop intuitive interfaces and software that Just Works."
Linux is not a company.
Windows isn't intuitive. Neither is Mac OS. Both are learned.
>> Um...you do know that there are 100 cents in a dollar right? Making it a 1000% increase to go from 10 cents to a dollar.
Well spotted... to further clarify, $1 is 1000% of 10 cents. But percentage markup is computed as (selling price - cost) / cost, so $1 is a 900% markup on a candy bar that costs 10 cents.
Still, quite a healthy profit!!
This is WRONG
Apple SUPPORTS digital rights management in it's latest iPod devices.
It supports audible audiobooks, which are DRM-style audio books.
You "enable" an audible device (and you can enable only so many), and they your watermarked/locked content only can play on that device.
See the ipod page for a little info.
No, it's just a coincidence.
[clueless lady walks away]
. . .
I hate it when people ask me that!
Why not just change your name?
Why should I change my name, he's the no-talent ass-clown?
--
That's pretty close to the quote, from memory.
And the artist list was hardly 'washed up'
Don't know if they could pull off a similar ad in today' climate...
Cake or Death? Cake Please!
So what do Mac users do when Blockbuster lets you download movies using DRM formats that expire in a week. It won't work on a Mac, so mac users will need to keep driving to the video store while pc users will be able to rent and download movies from their own homes. I guess Apple expects their users to get the movies for free using p2p.
Vote for Pedro
Steve would probably prefer EITHER 'big cheese' or 'head honcho' over 'head cheese'!! :D
I Ripped, Mixed and Burned the Jaguar install cds, and the developer cd for a friend earlier today. Thanks for making thievery so convenient, Apple!
I think you need to look deep inside yourself and ask why. You know the answer and it is why you are here. It is lonely being lonely alone. You learned at a young age that they won't talk to you, but they will yell at you. So you are against. If a cared, I would give you a hug.
As for the whole "Steve's Interest"... I'd sum it up this way.
Linux wants to free you... as long as you start working for the Horde...
Microsoft wants to own your soul and control every movement and every cent associated with you.
Apple wants to seperate you from your money as much as possible... and then have you take out a loan.
See subject
allow me to take screenshots for reviews.
"However, I'll still probably use Linux for 1) Game compatibility..."
You honestly think Linux has more commercial game support then Mac OS?
I like the Windows UI. I use my keyboard for more stuff than the mouse. Tab is good. Alt+F4. Alt+Accelerator keys. Ctrl+Tab. Y. Esc. Ctrl+Esc. Alt+Tab. Alt+Enter.
So many keystrokes... many of which just simply do not exist in many other OS. I'm not saying that the keystroke has to be the same... I'm saying that often, there is no way to do a task without a mouse. It's frustrating.
But despite all that... I still might switch to OSX (or OS11, or OS12, or whatever is out by then) if that's the only platform not implimenting DRM in five years.
At least the UI is better than the offerings that run under X.
"I will trust Google to 'do no evil' until the founders no longer run it." Hello Alphabet.
Apple, trying to hold a slice of the pie for itself, must charge more to have the money to stay in the game. If Apple isnt' slightly ahead at all times, they will fall under, fast and irreversibly.
Linux needs people to do work for it, and already numbers are decreasing per user ratio. This was bound to happen as Linux is not just for the kernel hackers anymore.
<RANT>Microsoft is just a bastard child of good marketing and industry cheating. There is no reason for them to expect what they expect of users, or treat them with the disrespect they do. Nor is it responisble of them to be careless and release bug-filled software, as I'm sure they don't do completely on purpose, but look at the stradegy this way:
- Rush a project to market. Early adopters buy. People are locked into the solution.
- Profit!
- Major bugs and incompatabilities are discovered. Charge for updates.
- Profit!
- Introduce Version 2.0 (Go back to step one)
Now, all computer companies are guilty of this, and software not being perfect, will always require after-version tweaks and such, but with the frequency it happens with Microsoft products, one has to wonder if they're doing it on purpose.</RANT>That is why I can hold my head high as an Apple supporter. Apple may just be another scumbag corporation, but at least they try to do it right for the arm and a leg they charge to stay in business.
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
Sure, that's why the MPAA/RIAA will be sure to release DRM protected content which allows consumers to use the content in the ways in which they want to use it.
They tried that already. It is called "non-DRM technology". Your arguments clearly show that you understand that the technology is not the issue, but rather it is what they will do with it. Can we trust them? How much do you trust them when you are buying a CD for $15 to listen to one track?
# make clean sig
Well, let's see, with WineX, I can play Diablo, Starcraft, any Warcraft, Stronghold, Deus Ex, and Counter Strike just to name a few.
Oh, and then there's the ports of the Doom games, the Quake games, Freespace 2, Heroes of Might and Magic, Soldier of Fortune, Rune, and a coming version of Neverwinter Nights that will all run natively on Linux.
Oh, and I can still play all my old awesome DOS games, too!
Now I will admit, I'm not familiar with what Mac supports, but don't imply that Linux can't play games.
I think I'm going to go boot my Gentoo UT2003-Live CD and load UT2003 into memory and have a fragging good time. Talk to you later. =)
~Dalcius
Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
"I tend to think of OS X as Linux with QA and Taste", James Gosling, creator of Java
A slight correction, Apple does not own Aqua, because their own court case made it legal precedent that you cannot own a "look and feel". Yes, Apple act like they own it, but this is because the law is not the same as justice. They have no legal right to send threatening letters to theme creators, if it went to court they'd lose. But of course, nobody wants to go to court, do they?
fair comment and a nicely drawn out parallel but you're missing a cruicial difference here: the pre-digital media format switches you're refering to relied on mechanical playback and were incompatible from switch to switch since the mechanism was completely different in each case (tried putting an LP in your cassette deck? or a tape in the CD tray?)
;)
the digital media switch you're describing won't work the same way because the playback mechanism remains EXACTLY THE SAME, all that's being changed is the encoding and that can be worked around.
it's software incompatibility vs hardware incompatibility - Apples and Oranges, and I like them Apples
Actually, you can make one copy for personal use and Apple doesn't have a problem with you.
Interesting. Do you have a link tho that information? I have access to a lot of MacOS X cds if I had a Mac. I wonder why they bother to sell "family" license packs for home use then when you have multiple machines since they don't care if you copy it? Are you sure they don't care if you copy it?
True, but they do have a copyright on the artwork itself, and theme creators that lifted Aqua directly where the first to be targeted and are a higher priority, I'm sure, than Joe Gumdrop-Looking-Theme Designer.
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
> can take more than 1-2 on your trip. (I'll take
> the quality hit for the advantage of being able
>to store more than 1-2 movies on my HD.)
I attempted to make my own divx's and had some serious problems getting one file with synched sound. I could only get portions of movies, the sound was off, and the one piece of advice was on how to make divx using one specific Windows only program...
Kyrina
I said one copy for backup purposes I did not say installing it on more machines.
Read Apple license agreement, it allows for one backup copy.
>> im sorry to nitpick, but 5-10 cents on a $1 cost is a 5,000 to 10,000% markup :)
Uh, could we see your math on that?
Let me guess, you majored in something other than math or economics...
What's that? You're not in college yet? Ah, sorry.
June 19, 2002 - 8:22 PM (PDT) - By Cimmerian
Static Decoded!:
Thanks to Erica, Smokehouse, Avalance, r00tw0rd and others for the decyphering of the audio. The static messages can be heard in the archive
MESSAGE 1:
i don't know what time is it
i don't know
it's not what you know, it's what you're licensed to know
unlicensed knowledge
unlicensed
unregulated knowledge is pornography
MESSAGE 2:
this is sometime after 2100
i don't know the exact time
(?????)
the air, all the air is gone
the sun burns us
i'm broadcasting from (??????)
unknown grid
there's still time to stop what's happening
you must stop what's happening before it's too late
there's still time
time
Tales from the Afternow
___________________________
I'm not a geek, but I play one on TV.
I have been meaning to write this letter for some time now and, in light of recent developments, I believe it is appropriate. Unless you share my view that it is far too easy for Mr. Tevis "Butthole Felcher Gerbil Fucker " Money to use fear, intimidation, sedating substances, and other tools to convince the worst types of viperine bureaucrats I've ever seen to force square pegs into round holes, there's no need for you to hear me further. I'm no expert, but it seems to me that he got into a snit the last time I pointed out that he has no real regard for other people's rights, privacy, or sanity. Sadly, lack of space prevents me from elaborating further. In public, he vehemently inveighs against corruption and sin. But when nobody's looking, he never fails to make human life negligible and cheap.
I've already said this a thousand times and with a thousand different phrasings, but if the human race is to survive on this planet, we will have to provide an atmosphere of mutual respect, free from oligarchism, hedonism, and all other forms of prejudice and intolerance. To say that skin color means more than skill and gender is more impressive than genius is simple-minded nonsense and untrue to boot. If Tevis would abandon his name-calling and false dichotomies, it would be much easier for me to identify, challenge, defy, disrupt, and, finally, destroy the institutions that cause unenlightened subversion to gather momentum on college campuses. His viewpoints are built on lies, and they depend on make-believe for their continuation.
Tevis behaves as if he's been lobotomized. But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that his surrogates have discounted their brain as a useless organ? That is, is he just trying to instill distrust and thereby create a need for his inhumane views? After days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conclusion that we are at a crossroads. One road leads into the light of a bright, shining future in which vexatious mattoids like Tevis are utterly absent. The other road leads into the darkness of Maoism. The question, therefore, is: Who's driving the bus? You see, we must focus on concrete facts, on hard news, on analyzing and interpreting what's happening in the world. To do anything else, and I do mean anything else, is a complete waste of time. If I have a bias, it is only against foolhardy menaces who drag men out of their beds in the dead of night and castrate them. If someone were to undermine the foundations of society until a single thrust suffices to make the entire edifice collapse, I'd rather it be an army of distasteful deadbeats than Tevis, because the latter is churlish, while the former are only unscrupulous. If we don't examine the warp and woof of his activities right now, then Tevis's expedients will soon start to metastasize until they make my stomach turn.
Because "anthropophysiography" is a word that can be interpreted in many ways, we must make it clear that the pen is a powerful tool. Why don't we use that tool to act honorably? Given the whiney political rhetoric of our times, every time Tevis utters or writes a statement that supports antagonism -- even indirectly -- it sends a message that we should avoid personal responsibility. I indisputably insist we mustn't let him make such statements, partly because even Tevis must concede that we are nearing a synthesis of heathenism and egotism into a lecherous antidisestablishmentarianism that will prevent me from sleeping soundly at night, but primarily because it will not be easy to criticize the obvious incongruities presented by him and his dupes. Nevertheless, we must attempt to do exactly that, for the overriding reason that this is not the first time I've wanted to acknowledge that Tevis's speeches are full of declamation, bloviation, obfuscation, and equivocation. But it is the first time I realized that I correctly predicted that he would change the course of history. Alas, I didn't think he'd do that so effectively -- or so soon. Tevis chooses to ignore the fact that his spin doctors internalize and adapt to the unwritten realities they must work under. In view of that, it is not surprising that he is reluctant to resolve problems. He always just looks the other way and hopes no one will notice that he thinks that all literature which opposes misoneism was forged by what I call dangerous rakes. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so. It is never easy to judge what the most appropriate or effective response to Tevis's sullen manuscripts is, but one unfortunate fact remains clear: When Tevis says that he can achieve his goals by friendly and moral conduct, in his mind, that's supposed to end the argument. It's like he believes he has said something very profound.
What that means, simply put, is that he refers to a variety of things using the word "counterrevolutionize". Translating this bit of jargon into English isn't easy. Basically, he's saying that he has been robbed of all he does not possess. At any rate, a great many of us don't want him to condition the public to accept violence as normal and desirable. But we feel a prodigious societal pressure to smile, to be nice, and not to object to his fatuitous musings. In a recent essay, Tevis stated that some people deserve to feel safe while others do not. Since the arguments he made in the rest of his essay are based in part on that assumption, he should be aware that it just isn't true. Not only that, but his faculty for deception is so far above anyone else's, it really must be considered different in kind as well as in degree. He maintains that he holds a universal license that allows him to write off whole sections of society. Perhaps it would be best for him to awaken from his delusional narcoleptic fantasyland and observe that he argues that the most valuable skill one can have is to be able to lie convincingly. I wish I could suggest some incontrovertible chain of apodictic reasoning that would overcome this argument, but the best I can do is the following: His attempts to take credit for others' accomplishments are much worse than mere careerism. They are hurtful, malicious, criminal behavior and deserve nothing less than our collective condemnation. Even if I agreed that Tevis's laughable antics were of paramount importance, it would still be the case that Tevis seeks scapegoats for his own shortcomings by blaming the easiest target he can find, that is, self-serving slanderers.
He sees all the evidence, but he is reluctant to accept the conclusion that it's easy to tell if he is lying. If his lips are moving, he's lying. By and large, Tevis's views have kept us separated for too long from the love, contributions, and challenges of our brothers and sisters in this wonderful adventure we share together -- life! On a completely different tack, I sometimes ask myself whether the struggle to express my views is worth all of the potential consequences. And I consistently answer by saying that if Tevis thinks that he has mystical powers of divination and prophecy, then he's sadly mistaken. I have one itsy-bitsy problem with his convictions. Videlicet, they support international crime while purporting to oppose it. And that's saying nothing about how it seems that no one else is telling you that the grossly fallacious reasoning behind his harangues can be confirmed by some simple fact-checking. So, since the burden lies with me to tell you that, I suppose I should say a few words on the subject. To begin with, the hour is late indeed. Fortunately, it's not yet too late to put an end to Tevis's evildoing.
False denials, pleas for sympathy, and a base campaign for smearing others with his own crimes constitute Tevis's whole method of defense. Even more remarkable, I want my life to count. I want to be part of something significant and lasting. I want to improve the living conditions of the most vulnerable in our society -- the sick, the old, the disabled, the unemployed, and our youth -- all of whose lives are made miserable by Tevis "Butthole Felcher Gerbil Fucker " Money.
His policies have merged with Marxism in several interesting ways. Both spring from the same kind of reality-denying mentality. Both test another formula for silencing serious opposition. And both sanctify his depravity. Maybe it's not fair to call Tevis's apologists "pouty" just because they incite pogroms, purges, and other mayhem, but remember that if everyone does his own, small part, together we can make this world a better place in which to live. What we're involved in with Tevis is not a game. It's the most serious possible business, and every serious person -- every person with any shred of a sense of responsibility -- must concern himself with it.
Never have I seen such a gross error in judgment as his decision to alter, rewrite, or ignore past events to make them consistent with his current "reality". He finds enemies everywhere, yes. But when I first became aware of his covert invasion into our thought processes, all I could think was how some people think it's a bit extreme of me to think outside the box -- a bit over the top, perhaps. Well, what I ought to remind such people is that I can no longer get very excited about any revelation of Tevis's hypocrisy or crookedness. It's what I've come to expect by now. If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to shelter initially unpopular truths from suppression, enabling them to ultimately win out through competition in the marketplace of ideas. Tevis wants to violate strongly held principles regarding deferral of current satisfaction for long-term gains. You know what groups have historically wanted to do the same thing? Fascists and Nazis.
You'd think I'd be pretty well inured by now to the lunacies of his undertakings, but I have to say that he is driving me nuts. I can't take it anymore! The key point here is that Tevis is not as scornful or wrongheaded as you might think. He's more so. It seems to me that he is both abhorrent and brown-nosing. Now there's a dangerous combination if I've ever seen one. Finally, this has been a good deal of reading, and unquestionably difficult reading at that. Still, I hope you walk away from it with the new knowledge that Mr. Tevis "Butthole Felcher Gerbil Fucker " Money is a shoo-in for this year's awarding of "most pea-brained use of extremism".
Lik Sang is having a blow out sale of MOD chips for next generation Intel and AMD processors.
... and the original source of their venture capital (selling cable blackboxes)...
I hereby place the above post in the public domain.