Slashdot Mirror
Will Apple Follow Microsoft's Lead to Restrictive DRM?
Steve Ryan asks: "The direction Microsoft are taking with Windows (for example, the DRM issues in Vista) have led me to believe Windows will soon be an OS which controls the user, rather than the other way round. I like XP, and I find it stable, but I do not want to upgrade to an OS (Vista) which is restrictive. This leaves me with either Linux or Mac OS X. I like Linux, but it may not work with my laptop, so I don't really want to risk it. OS X seems nice. I spend most of my time writing documents and surfing the web, so it should handle everything I want, and I would be happy to buy a lovely MacBook Pro. This leaves me with my question: Will Apple follow Microsoft's lead and implement a DRM loving policy?"
Apple already controls the input components and drivers, so they're two steps ahead of MS here.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
"like Linux, but it may not work with my laptop, so I don't really want to risk it."
Download a risk free Ubuntu Live CD and find out. I don't see what risks there are.
"OS X seems nice. I spend most of my time writing documents and surfing the web, so it should handle everything I want, and I would be happy to buy a lovely MacBook Pro."
Why spend $2000 on a laptop to surf the web and write documents? Most Linux distros come with Open Office and Firefox preinstalled, perfect for what you need.
It sounds like you're just looking for an excuse to buy a Mac. It's true that Linux has some issues with laptops but there is no risk to try it out.
I read all this talk about DRM and Windows Vista. Will DRM still have an effect if you don't use DRM media, and if do you DRM media, shouldn't any OS incur the same wrath when using said files? If your movies are still DVD, and your music still MP3, DRM is irrelevant, so how many users will really be hindered by Vista's extremely restrictive operation? I have been using Windows Vista for a couple weeks, and really like it. My only issue being that Media Center won't play my xvid movies, but there is no DRM in these movies.
What--Apple hates DRM now? Look at everything on iTunes. Look at Job's role as largest shareholder in Disney--why would he not want to use DRM to protect his property? If you want to see the DRM of Apple, just buy a movie from Apple (like "Cars"). Then try to burn it to DVD. Or try to play it on a PSP or Creative Zen:Vision or your favorite Archos PMP. Yeah, it would suck if Apple started adopting DRM.
Every intel mac ships with a "trusted" computing module and apple uses DRM on every tune or movie they sell. You can't burn itunes tv shows to DVD, you can't transfer music from an ipod to a computer (easily), you can't transfer DRMd songs to any player but an ipod.
Anyone that thinks Apple is better than Microsoft needs to take a history lesson. Apple acts exactly like microsoft, but is too small to be effective. Hell, the only reason we use PCs today and not macs is Steve Jobs wanted the whole computer pie and wouldn't settle for just controlling the operating system.
IMHO, Apple would be a fool to consider tighter DRM. A significant portion of the (increasing) user base is switching to avoid Windows. Every step Apple makes toward emulating Windows flaws is one less way they can claim to "think different."
But it will be slightly less evil DRM than Microsoft's (if there can be such a thing.)
c ost.txt
For those who haven't heard about the Vista DRM "features", please read this:
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_
I think this thread boils down to a single issue: Microsoft's "Genuine Advantage" program is threatening to remotely self-destruct people's computers. Apple isn't.
And OS X will? (Legally?)
Anyway, Linux or BSD is guaranteed freedom while OS X you have to trust a company. It's that simple. We can analyze Apple all we want but in the end it is a company that can decide to turn one way or the other at any moment. Not so with your average Linux distro.
Or play both sides and get a Mac and dual-boot. Keep your files in open or standard formats so you can easily move to other OSes.
You'd be surprised at how easy Linux runs on laptops. I'm typing this on a Compaq nx6325 and it runs Linux just fine. Just search around for some of the ACPI hacks though... you can burn up your processor if you're not careful.
Any issues you have can be solved on linuxquestions.org. I guaruntee that you will have all of your hardware working within a month. Most of it (if not, all of it) within a week.
-jX
Don't you just love politics? It's like a comedy of errors.
The day i notice it I'm selling my apple stock for redhat, and installing linux on my macbook. Fuck em.
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
Here's my take on them:
:)
Vista: it's okay (as of RC2). I'm not feeling the DRM though, and will probably remove it from my system in the near future.
OSX: This is what I'm using now. With Parallels/Boot Camp/VMWare, you should be able to use anything that doesn't have an OSX port.
Linux: I really wouldn't use it for a desktop machine. At least not yet. Of course, if you're going to use it for development and not for typical office stuff, it'd probably work perfectly for you.
Anyways, out of those three, I prefer OSX myself. Hope this helps!
US businesses that currently accept chip and PIN/signature
Apple has led, is leading and will continue to lead the DRM future. Intel is close behind because they created HDCP, the hardware level copying mechanism in use by HDCP compliant HDMI ports in current generation high-end monitors and televisions.
Intel Macs now come with the beloved Trusted Computing module installed, and while most say that it is not used now, Apple is the only one deploying it widely to their user base. It will get used in the future.
Apple is now, and will continue the move to a media platform. Such a move is going to require very tight control over the content that is deployed to the platform. The only way that Apple can assure content providers that their content is "safe" is by deploying draconian measures to be sure that we cannot really "own" the content that we "borrow" from the rights holders, be it movies, songs, TV shows or newspapers.
Microsoft has less of interest in owning your content, sure they have to assure content providers that their content will not be used in improper ways - however their OS isn't targeted specifically to content creation and consumption. In reality, Microsoft can't really compete with Apple on completeness of media offering because they would be sued for anti-trust violations (and have).
While Microsoft has incorporated HDCP support for high-def content, the drives to play this content for pc's still range in the 000's. You can be sure when Apple starts to ship macs with blue-ray drives that HDCP will become a requirement. You also won't notice that it's there because with exception for the macpro and mac mini there is little need for external displays.
Interestingly, blue ray-discs may be encoded to play high def content via HDMI only at the studios discretion. Given that this capability exists today, Microsoft is not responsible for the movement to protect high def content.
To be clear, MS is not leading this charge. It has been built into the blue-ray standard, the hardware connections, and boards of a wide range of devices. This is a ground up attack at our ability to move content around. The MPAA and RIAA figure if you make the hardware aware of the content, then you can police the content better. They might be right... only time will tell.
If M$ does not deploy support for these standards then we will not have the ability to watch any of the content. The same will happen on OS X except that it will be less apparent due to the lack of HDCP compatibility issues across the most popular macs (MacBook, MacBook Pro). Apple will provide a better "user experience" because they control both the hardware and software that they sell to customers. Of course, Microsoft will look like the bad guy because they have little control over the hardware that ends up in consumers homes.
1) Apple DRM has nothing to do with moving music off an iPod. The music is stored in a hidden folder and can be copied off trivially.
2) Apple DRMed songs can trivially (in iTunes) be burned to a CD, opening up to a world of CD players and DVD players. If you choose to re-encode again you can transfer to additional devices other than iPods.
3) Apple has never acted like Microsoft. Microsoft has raised Windows license fees or withheld licenses from companies promoting or developing competing technologies (OS/2 and Netscape). The closest is when Apple withdrew licenses from clonemakers exactly because they did not want to only sell operating systems. Microsoft has also developed competitive technologies rather than endorsing existing solutions so they could extract more control (WMA instead of AAC, WMV instead of MPEG4, Direct3D instead of OpenGL, MTP instead of UMS, etc)
Maybe your point (Apple is a corporation, not an entity) would be better made as, "Don't trust Apple to be good by you unless it also helps them as well".
GPL Deconstructed
Don't expect Apple or any other proprietary systems vendors to protect your freedom. They're not interested in your freedom.
They are very interested in making and maintaining sweetheart deals with studios and record companies, so that they can be the middleman who sells the movies and music that those other companies put out.
Only open systems can be expected to protect your freedom. Proprietary systems are by definition intended to take away your freedom to do as you wish with them. They are designed to remove your ability to modify them as you see fit. Your freedom is only guaranteed when source is available. Anything else is just a hope and a prayer.
You mean every time there's a major update? "Your computer will be restarted in 5:00" infuriates me.
The short answer is "Yes."
If you want to sell the Mac in the consumer market. If you want to compete with that Vista media PC from HP or Dell and it's 50 GB HD-DVD or Blu-Ray drive. If you want to sell that big HD wide-screen monitor.
If you want to sell HD content through iTunes.
The mwre title of the next and last Harry Potter novel became headline news worldwide. Think of what the video rights to that series alone is worth. Think of what it is worth to Apple.
Linux works fine on the laptop. Use an Ubuntu livedisc (dapper or edgy- dapper has Long Term Support, whereas Edgy is more up to date) to test it out to make sure it works before installing, and when installing do a dualboot- it's not hard to do (literally all you have to do is check the radio button to partition the hard disc and select the percentage of the HD to give the preexisting OS) and that way if things don't work out in ubuntu your windows install is safe and sound, leaving you free to try out another distro.
I specify Ubuntu because it has a livedisc installer, and I know the partitioning on the installer is extremely easy to do- doesn't hurt that Ubuntu is also a fairly newbie-friendly distro.
That said, if you want to prepare yourself for a switch in general, the best thing to do is replace as many of your current apps with crossplatform and/or opensource apps, and open or standard file formats for all your documents- OpenOffice.org, gAIM, Firefox for more common stuff; xchat ( http://silenceisdefeat.org/~b0at/xchat/win32/ - several builds don't have the $20 fee), and so forth for less common apps. Mostly, applications are interchangeable, files may not be. You need to identify any sticking points first, before the switch- this applies to any platform.
Don't blame linux or os x for being "broken" when "broken" really just means "different". This is generally more a problem with old geezers/technophobes, but also a problem with people who are used to Windows's way of doing things.
It's been said by some that the people who have the hardest time switching are the "power users", because they have a lot of knowledge of "how to do *somewhat advanced thing*" that isn't the same across OSes. An example would be something like changing the screen resolution, or maybe a bit more advanced, setting up a printer; or adding/removing users.
Care about privacy? Read this!
Every intel mac ships with a "trusted" computing module
Theonly use of which is for OS X to recognize it is running on Apple hardware - it IS NOT USED to prevent you from running Linux or any other OS, or adding your own OS X drivers, as Microsoft had been talking about.
and apple uses DRM on every tune or movie they sell.
That you can easily remove - even the video you can simply re-record with any number of video screen capture software. This is mandated by content providers, not Apple - remember Apple is the one that brought DRM to this loose state. Microsoft is the one giving you protected video paths with Vista.
You can't burn itunes tv shows to DVD
You can if you simply copy it.
you can't transfer music from an ipod to a computer (easily)
Since iTunes recognizes ID3 tags it is childs play to copy a whole directory of music from any iPod you can mount into iTunes, and have the music all show up.
you can't transfer DRMd songs to any player but an ipod.
But you can also choose to move the songs to other formats that lack DRM and move them that way. There is an out.
People like you have been blasting Apple for DRM use for years when in fact Apple is the company that is slowly backing studios out of DRM use. the MP3 sales trial recently on Yahoo would never have been done if Apple had not locked up the popular use of DRM with Apple instead of an indsutry controlled company such as Microsoft.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Actually, starting with v6 Ubuntu live CDs and install CDs are the same one disk. Ubuntu installs from link icon on live CD's desktop. Very cool idea, actually.
The only restrictions on installing Mac OS X are a label on the box that says "Don't steal software." Windows XP and Vista require activation.
Considering that Apple is a hardware company, lost revenue from someone not paying for a license is not a huge issue. The same cannot be said for Microsoft -- they have negative hardware revenue (e.g. subsidies on Xbox and Zune devices) -- lost software revenue hurts their bottom line.
So what makes you think Apple would want a "DRM loving policy"?
-ch
Where did you get $2k when a MacBook costs $1.099?
GPL Deconstructed
So why would someone want to run OS X on something OTHER than an Apple made computer? Do Mac owners want to deal with cheap hardware, driver problems, things not working? And what is the cost benefit? Like $100?
No thanks. I'm perfectly happy with my iMac. No problems. However, my Windows XP PC......that is a whole other story.
And what is wrong with iTunes? It has, by far, the fairest DRM. You can burn unlimited copies of the music (you are limited to a certain number per playlist, but you can make a new Playlist and do more). You can always burn a CD, and re-import it.
Seriously, these arguments are old and tired.
It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
I moderate therefore I rule!
--
Of course, most of the POP stuff out there, like 90%+ of the stuff on iTunes, is so compressed when mastered that an MP3 of it really doesn't sound much different than the actual CD. All that Rap, and Maroon 5, Fray, etc.
It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
I moderate therefore I rule!
--
Decompressing and recomperssing, even with the same lossy algo, decreases quality. Rendering you pointless and your point invalid.
Once, Microsoft rebooted everybody who had auto reboot turned off but Windows Update turned on. That's when it became clear who was in control.
GGP said MacBook Pro. Store.apple.com says MacBook Pro from $1999. I have no idea where GP got 2,000 from though. . .
disclaimer: I've been known to store numbers in my ass for which to dig out when quantities are required.
That was me posting, and I've worked with pro audio for over 10 years, so can your shit. There is a loss of quality from going out of a DAC and into an ADC, period. I don't give a crap that your dad's a DJ, because you obviously haven't done anything serious with music. Go pull out an oscilloscope and do a frequency analysis on that "lossless" copy, will you? Then come back and tell me that it's the same signal. You'll be surprised to find that it IS NOT.
Even though the signal is all internal, you don't seem to understand that you are going through multiple signal processors, and as such there is always a change in the final sound. What you've said is entirely irrelevant simply due to that. Now, once you have some experience and have grown past your current age of eleventeen, maybe you can come back after you've learned how this stuff actually works.
You're not fooling anyone.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo!
You comment that you don't mind spending $2000 for a new Mac so you can switch to OS X, but you don't consider the same scenario for Linux. So, why not consider plunking down $2000 on a ThinkPad and running Linux on it?
Game! - Where the stick is mightier than the sword!
The fairest DRM is SonicStage. Letting you create unlimited copies with the latest version, de-DRM them etc.You're not limited on SonicStage.You lose sound quality that way.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
then why are you even worried about DRM?
These activities are available to you without problems on Windows, Linux, and OS X.
It looks like you are doing a poor job of rationalizing your desire for a Mac.
Ever hear of kernel extensions and raw device access? OSX does nothing to prevent you from accessing your hardware. You can use Apple's fancy APIs if you want, but you can dig deeper if you prefer, just as you can in Linux or BSD. Windows Vista is the only one that has a protected kernel space, encrypted memory, and randomized memory locations, keeping the user locked away from their hardware.
"I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
This simply doesn't compare to what Microsoft is doing.
So what are you going to do? Write your own OS?
Like you said, maybe there aren't enough choices for "YOU" but for me (and millions of others)the iMac to Mac Pro jump isn't a big issue. Stating the iMac isn't a viable video game machine because you can't upgrade the video card isn't a valid argument at this point, but may be an issue in the future. Unless you can point me to a game that is more demanding than Half-Life 2 with maxed out settings (I'm sure there are some, but I'm not exactly a hard core gamer), I would say the iMac is a GREAT gaming platform for 99% of the games available.
I keep hearing this, but it isn't really a freebie.
They allow this because it isn't a "perfect digital copy", it is more akin to taping an album onto a cassette.
Apple starts with the full-quality original digital file (.wav).
Then they encode it (which lowers the quality from the original), and they sell it to you for $.99.
Then you burn to a CD, which creates a perfect copy (.wav) of the lower quality file that they sold you.
Then you encode to mp3, which creates a lower quality copy of the lower quality file that Apple sold you.
They don't mind because there is a generational loss involved, unless you encode the CD to FLAC. But even then you only have a perfect copy of an imperfect copy of the original that takes up 5-10 times as much storage space as the lower-quality file that they sold you. It's not the freebie that so many people tout, there is generational loss and/or storage bloat as an associated cost of transferring music you "purchased" to your "unauthorized" systems.
A house divided against itself cannot stand.
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Also, what did you not get from the GP's statement that Apple was a hardware company? Guess what, they sell the hardware their software is to run on.
Oh and 'sceme' is spelled 'scheme.'
That's wrong. Writing an AAC file to a CD is pretty much a prefect digital copy. It doesn't sound worse. However, if you then re-encode the CD to a non-lossless file, you've lost some information. You're free to encode to a lossless format, of course, but even if you don't, most people won't be able to tell the difference between the original file and the re-encoded non-DRM'd file. This is not at all similar to a cassette copy.
Really, there's no comparison to a cassette tape. These re-encoded songs sound way better than a cassette, even an original cassette. I mean, I know people who listen to music using youtube, for god's sake. If you're not an audiophile (and if you are, you're a) not Apple's target market and b) probably overestimating your ability to find flaws in recorded music), writing and re-encoding has only one problem: it's a hassle to do it.
Linux supports TPM natively. Mac OS X doesn't (and more recent Macs don't even include the hardware anymore).
I don't think you understand just how much DRM there is in Vista. Read this and weep.
Apple simply can't compare with this.
If you reencode (is that a word?) an mp3 or a jpeg with the same setting, it doesn't do anything on successive tries, does it? If you crank up the compression rate it does, but what if you keep the settings the same, say 128 or "high"? I thought jpegs just sample the values of each pixel to each other and throws out what it doesn't need. If the settings for "high" have already thrown out the unneeded pixels, it won't continue to throw away pixels on successive identical setting compressions, will it? I don't know, but I just figured mp3 settings did the same thing, basically. If you keep resampling an audio file at 128, it is going to do, well, nothing after the first time. This would explain why the file sizes don't decrease on successive resamples, unless you actually decrease the sampling rate.
Uhm, no. Somebody working for Apple was leaking Apple's trade secrets, and Apple wanted to find out who it was. This had nothing to do with bloggers (Mac rumor sites usually aren't even blogs), freedom of the press or first amendment rights. Don't be stupid.
Surely... OSX won't work on your laptop either?
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
You say you like linux, but it you're unsure as to whether it will work on your laptop. But you say you'd be willing to buy a Macbook. Why wouldn't you be willing to buy a linux compatible laptop? There are plenty around (you have to be looking for them - but they're not that hard to come by)
I currently have one of the last 12" powerbooks, fantastic machine, OSX is great, but I wish I could run linux instead (lack of 3D support, and sleep ability currently stopping me). The next machine I buy will be linux ready from the very start.
My advice: try to buy a machine which won't restrict your OS choice entirely from the start, it'll be worth it if you start itching to switch later on.
.sigs are for losers
Geez, your post reads like you were just making it up as you went along, yet it got modded 5. Fascintaing.
Maybe you should familiarize with Protected Media Path in Windows Vista, Output Trust Authorities in particular.
Actually, they are if it helps them sell their stuff. And it does: While Microsoft ads more DRM in each version of Windows, Apple can point to that and tell its users: What would you rather have, that mess or our relatively lenient DRM?
That's very much a competitive advantage.
Oh. So how come every time I changed something on my Dell, I got to call Microsoft and explain myself to them, while I had never any kind of problem like this with my Mac?
That won't be true anymore with Vista
Because I some how doubt they are going to give worse performance.
Graphic cards aren't everything, you need fast RAM, a motherboard that can support RAM at such speeds etc.
I still have x86 computers from seven years ago, I upgrade them a bit still, because they're capable of doing more. None of my Macs have even survived this long (mostly due to hardware issues, but also because they're becoming utterly useless in what they can do).
Second life -- Just try all the settings maxed out.
Perhaps. But then again, I don't really see how it's superior to most modern PCs (with similar specs) for sale out there.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Can you play Eve-Online on that iMac?
Then it's not a great gaming platform, sorry.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Pardon my bluntness, but that's really no different than asking what's wrong with lethal injection because it's, by far, the least painful method of execution. But regardless of the method you're still dead, just as regardless of the DRM, you're still restricted.
Wrong! You can burn a CD and re-import it until Apple decides you can't. And that mere possibility is more than enough to make it entirely unacceptable.
Like you, I'm happy with my iMac. However, that does not mean I think Apple can do no wrong, and neither should it mean such for you.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
They effectively controlled their hardware for 20 years so it isn't like they don't support the mindset. Just an observation from someone who couldn't justify getting a first Mac but who could afford a 10 mhz PC clone XT.
Yes it is reasonably good digital copy of the less than perfect digital copy of the original that you would have gotten if you bought the original CD. It doesn't take an audiophile to tell the difference between an AAC and the original .wav file. So, to start with, Apple is selling you a less than perfect digital copy of the original song.
However, when you "rip to CD", that reasonably good digital copy of the AAC takes over 10 times as much storage space as the AAC that you bought from Apple.
So my point that there is a cost (increased storage space) associated with ripping to CD still stands. And if you re-encode to MP3 to avoid the storage space cost, there is a cost (degradation), and I would argue strongly that at that point you definitely don't have to be an audiophile to tell the difference between the original CD and the twice-encoded MP3 that comes out the other end of the process.
A house divided against itself cannot stand.
That's a good point. I'm about to replace my 3-year-old iBook with a Thinkpad X60 tablet. I would have gotten a Mac, but Apple doesn't make a tablet so I couldn't. I may very well try to run OS X on it anyway, though (and, given that I do own two Macs already, I have absolutely no moral qualms about doing so). It's not my fault Apple wouldn't build what I need.
To be fair, the plural of "anecdote" is not "data." If you want an anecdote, here's one: I've owned two Macs, and many non-Macs over the years. Listed in order of reliability, best to worst, they are as follows: home-built w/early FIC Athlon motherboard, iMac Core Duo, Thinkpad 560X, home-built w/Gigabyte 7VRXP motherboard, Compaq P4 laptop, iBook G4, refurbished Packard Bell 486, HP K6-2 laptop, Emachines K6-2 laptop.
Everything up to the Compaq I'd consider to have "good" reliability, the iBook (which nevertheless I'm using to type this on) I'd consider "fair," and the rest I'd consider "poor." Of course, once you account for the fact that the iBook has had, by far, the roughest life (I've carried it back and forth to college with me for the past 3 years, while the rest of the laptops tended to sit at home), I think its reliability has actually been pretty good. So, in general, I'd consider Apple machines to be some of the highest-quality out there, right up with IBM and building it myself.
Applecare is at worst inconsistent, not uniformly "horrible." If it were, there wouldn't be people like me around, who had good experiences with it.
Really? The Wikipedia article doesn't mention any of that. If what you say is true, why does it bother with DRM at all? (And speaking of "no DRM at all," only that is really the "fairest DRM!")
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
More importantly, if you're willing to buy new hardware in order to run OS X why wouldn't you be equally willing to buy new hardware in order to run Linux? It's possible to specifically pick a laptop that is fully compatible with Linux, you know!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
No. A program could be smart enough to notice you're trying to save an unchanged JPEG in the same quality it already was in, and do nothing... but that's not what we're talking about here. If the JPEG gets turned into a bitmap, and then the bitmap turned into a JPEG again then the compressing algorithm has no way to differentiate the image from the "digital artifacts" (noise, distortion) than the first compression added... so it might spend some bits in trying to encode said artifacts, with further loss to the original image.
It's the same with audio.
As a Slashdot discussion grows longer, the probability of an analogy involving cars approaches one.
You obviously aren't asking a question, since you already have the answer you want to hear. Point me to a demo, and I'll let you know how Eve-Online plays on a 2.33 Core 2 Duo iMac with 2 gigs of Ram and a 256mb X1600 video card. I'm going to guess it plays it just as well as any PC with the same specs, because, it is the same computer. If my iMac can't play this game, then what PC can? Is it just video card power that is needed, because I'm hard pressed to find consumer lines of PCs that have a faster processor than my iMac.
Having had both PowerBooks and Thinkpads, I much prefer the hardware of the latter. So much so I ended up switching back to GNU/Linux because despite the superiority of Mac OS X, a T60 + GNU/Linux was a better choice for me than a Macbook + Mac OS X. But a Thinkpad + Mac OS X would have been even better.
You know, I know there are some people there who seriously believe that there is no computer out there that hasn't been bettered by Apple, but honestly, I can't understand the attitude beyond inane fanboyism of the Amiga variety. Apple's hardware has always been interesting, but to argue it's always been superior to absolutely everything requires a deliberate blindness to reality that's hard to fathom.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
These experiences I have I know aren't unique to me, as I've talked about this with others who have had the same issues.First time I've heard this. Usually, those I've talked to who haven't had problems, just didn't deal with Apple-care in the first place.
From the wikipedia article you linked:
SonicStage 3.4 includes an option to de-DRM your whole library (obviously the larger your library is, the longer this will take) allowing as many copies of files as you like, on as many players as you want, on as many PCs as you want. You can even share non-DRM files with friends or colleagues.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
So are you saying the iMac uses slow ram and has a motherboard that can't support it? (667MHz DDR2 SDRAM (PC2-5300))
I've experienced the exact opposite. So much so, I'm just gonna call bull and say you don't really have a mac, otherwise you wouldn't make such wild claims. My G4 tower is 6 years old and it runs just fine. I upgraded the cpu from 350 to 800 about 2 or 3 years ago, but that's all I've ever done. The main reason I have mostly macs is because they last more than the two or three years (max) that the pc's I've owned do. Hell, this work pc I'm on now is only a couple of years old (P4 1.7GHz) and it is practically a dinosaur. It barely runs Win 2000 and probably can't even run XP (I'll have to ask the computer nerds why the rest of the PCs at school use XP, but our older ones in the office only have 2000). At least my 6 year old G4 can run the current version of Mac OS X. Old pc's, if they can muster the horsepower to run XP, still have compatibility issues with XP builds that you don't see with any of the G4 or newer Macs. This problem will only become more obvious with Vista.
But let's not let our own experiences cloud our judgement and let's look to the data instead. I'm not sure what's wrong with your Apple hardware, considering they are consistently #1 in both customer satisfaction and repair rates. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2006502,00.as p. Arguing against the quality of Apple hardware is done out of spite and not by looking at the data that exists.
I'll give it a spin and let you know. I didn't say it was superior to modern pcs, but when you look at it, it IS a modern PC. How can something be superior to itself? I'm disputing your challenge that the iMac is not a viable gaming machine, regardless of the less-than-ideal X1600 video card.The same goes for 128 Mp3s. I thought someone was claiming every time you make a copy of a 128 sampled mp3 file it resamples it and loses quality. IF that was the claim, then they were clearly wrong and proved it so with their own logic, no? If I buy an iTunes song, then burn a cd copy, then distribute that copy to 50 other devices, the bottom line is that the copies are the same as the purchased drm file, so what's the problem? I supposed I could keep degrading the quality of the file by trying to compress it 50 times, or I could just redistribute the copy of the file in its original format. Am I missing something here?
When I talk about a "bitmap" I'm not talking about a BMP file. A "Bitmap" is a pixel-matrix representation of an image.
If you load up a JPEG in Photoshop, it's stored internally as a bitmap... if you change a couple of pixels and save, you take a quality loss because of the original digital artifacts.
When you burn an MP3 as a CD, you're doing the equivalent of a JPEG->Bitmap conversion... since the song is stored as an uncompressed PCM waveform in the CD. When you recompress it you take a quality loss, since the original MP3 encoding is not stored in the CD, so the compressor can't tell what's data and what's digital artifacts.
As a Slashdot discussion grows longer, the probability of an analogy involving cars approaches one.
This is how I see the three platforms measuring up:
LINUX - Since it doesn't embrasce DRM, content providers are not interested in supplying their creative to it. This means only non-commercial or very small indy media would be available. Further, since Linux is more of a "hacker's OS" it isn't well suited for households where a non-tech may want to jump on the web or download photos from the family digital camera. No Thanks.
Windows Vista - "DRM isn't just for music any more." This should be the Vista theme. Actually it has started a while back. I love how MS office refuses to register becuase the key has been used too many times - no matter the computer hasn't changed, just been upgraded with more RAM and newer hard drive. But MS can't even decide on one DRM schema so they implemented "PlaysForSure" AND a non-compatible "Zune" DRM schema - THIS IS MORE FREIGHTENING! If the DRM provider stopps supporting the DRM content you are SOL. ONE THING IS FOR CERTAIN - Either the Zune will fail or Plays FOr Sure will fail (is it too soon to think both have already failed?) and those who bought DRMed content and expensive players will have nothing to show for it. Which leads me to...
Apple OS X - Making a DRM choice is important. One thing I like about Apple is that there are no license keys to type in. There is no "registering with big brother" even for high end software. Plus Apple is REASONABLE - $129 for a single OS upgrade or $199 for a 5 license Family Pack! Apple doesn't rely on DRM to secure their software, only the media that Apple doesn't even supply. Apple fought for user rights when they negotiated DRM with the RIAA and in my opinion, the rights are pretty good. I can still burn mixed CDs to give to friends, I can play on my work, home, and laptop computers - be they Mac or Windows - and I can use on a variety of iPods. I don't pretend to have super human ears or need OGG support and since I find the convenience of iTunes out weighs the "quality" of buying the CD/DVD I have settled into enjoying the DRM Apple is selling.
This is my opinion. I have switched from Windows to Linux to the Mac and I don't see myself switching again until Windows, Linux, or another OS make radical advances.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
"Lenient" is a really strange choice of words when you're talking about the use of your own computer.
I don't want lenience from Apple or Microsoft.
I want them to sell me software that works for ME, not for someone else.
Yea, very few people can really hear the difference. I happen to be one of those people, which is good in some ways but sucks in others. I can tolerate MP3 audio, but I'd much rather listen to an uncompressed CD.
I'm also not one of those people who claims to be an audiophile then goes ahead and decimates the recording by running it through a tube amp. That simply cracks me up - tubes, by their very nature, color the sound.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo!
I will leave you with this nugget, though: I recently helped someone who had their Mac crash. She had moved from computer to computer paying little attention to her iTunes account. But this time, there was a problem. She had authorized all her available computers to play her music collection. She had her files backed up, but she had lost her system drive in her Mac and it was gone at this point. I thought she was screwed. It turns out, there is a little known feature of your iTunes account whereby you can reset your authorized computers on your account with Apple. The only catch is that you can only do this once a year.
Check it out here.
I wish that were the case, however, no, there was nothing incorrect about what I stated. What happens when you play an mp3 is that it is rendered into PCM wave files based on data that it doesn't have but can reproduce to a certain degree of accuracy. When you recompress an mp3, say burning it to a CD and then ripping it again, you have burned raw PCM data that was generated by the mp3 codec from the mp3. This in itself is already lossy, since the file is of the same quality as the mp3. When you go back in and recompress that PCM data, you're compressing already lossy data by removing even more data.
It really is about equivalent to opening a jpeg - which rasterizes it into a raw bitmap - then saving that raw bitmap with compression, then opening it again, and saving it. Programs these days are smart enough with jpegs not to even save it if no changes have been made, however if the jpeg is saved, it's by definition recompressed. Likewise with mp3, aac, whatever, unless you're doing a bit by bit copy of the original file - which is just a copy, not recompression, then you're not getting the same quality of audio. However, if you do what the original poster said and I replied to, then yes, there is a quality loss, because you're outputting to an audio stream, and capturing and recompressing that audio stream.
As for removing the DRM from an audio file, the only way to do that without losing sound quality is to decrypt the file. Playing it and recompressing it is by nature going to lose quality, as well using an internal hook and recompressing it.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo!
So what you are saying is that you would be willing to buy a new laptop for OSX, but not for Linux.
OSX may not run on your current laptop -- I doubt you want to risk it. No -- lets be clear... OSX WILL NOT RUN.
On to your question: yes, Apple is DRM friendly. May I recommend that that you just stick with XP? Really, its your best bet. Since you are incredibly biased against Linux, I would rather you NOT try that.
Ratboy
Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
There is no way to future-proof DRM, and thus adopting any technology that incorporates it will always be a gamble.
Of course, you'll pry my iPod out of my cold, dead hands... but for me that's because its general greatness outweighs the DRM risks, not because its DRM is somehow more friendly or ultimately less restrictive.
--
As far as I know it boils down to this:
Windows XP
DRM is implemented in individual applications such as iTunes. No fundamental support for DRM. You don't need to use DRM even if you use applications that potentially support DRM (again, such as iTunes).
Mac OS X
DRM is implemented in individual applications such as iTunes. No fundamental support for DRM. You don't need to use DRM even if you use applications that potentially support DRM (again, such as iTunes).
Linux
Kernel-level support for TPM.
Vista
DRM is a fundamental part of Vista. You can't get around it.
No, but I had a theory that the PCs you were comparing to had slower bus speeds.
My old imacs, powerbook have suffered again and again logicboard failures. Powerbook's wireless card kept dying. Dealing with Apple-care was atrocious each time.
Later I got a Mac mini. It was emitting a high pitch noise whenever it was turned on. Within the first week, the internal wireless card just stopped connecting to my network. I didn't want to-do the Apple-care dance so I just ignored it. Then two weeks later, the entire Mac stopped working, I returned it and couldn't get a full refund. Unfortunately I didn't have the time to actually pursue the matter at the time.
What's been a major deal breaker for me with the new Macs, is that a lot of the latest hardware from Apple make high pitch noises (most people can't hear them).
Oldest x86 system that's used daily here (in this house), is a Pentium 3 system from 1999 (only thing I've upgraded was the RAM and harddrives so far in it), which is being actively used as a desktop - Running Windows XP Pro SP2, has a few old games on it too. It runs pretty well (responsive), although takes two and half minutes to boot and get into desktop.
That said, there are also sold 'models' of computers that don't work really well unless you upgrade them in some way (usually it's a obscenely small amount of RAM).
I have a five year old p4 1.8ghz (was advertised as 2ghz -- Intel's fault), not noticeably slow for everyday tasks (although Second life run 14fps average at mostly low settings -- not really good).
Yeah, I could probably shove Vista on the P4 system, it's well within the minimum specifications, I'd just need to upgrade the graphic card to get proper DX10 support. But to be honest, there is nothing in Vista I'm particularly interested in yet.
I'm more interested in comparisons against Asus, Acer, Hp, Optimus.. Since eMachines, Gateway are unheard of (and Sony isn't known for selling laptops here -- here being Poland).
From the article by the way, As we've said in the past, Mac owners are unusually passionate about their machines, and this may have had an effect on the company's unusually high Service and Reliability scores.
Despite the fact that it doesn't really explain why so many people I've met on-line who have used Apple-care have had problems with them (helpers in Mac help channels on IRC have even admitted this). Additionally I must of used Apple-care over twenty times in my life and each and every-time, it was long and difficult to deal with.
I suppose you could call that out of spite, as I've never seen any real statistics so I will take the statistics you gave as reliable.
What I mea
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
It's not like it eats your laptop whole. Get some good distro and try it out. Stop whining. Waste your time, not other people's.
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you
I agree.
"Why spend $2000 on a laptop to surf the web and write documents?" Why would he have to spend $2000 on a Mac laptop? They don't start that high.
Actually, it's the best laptop keyboard I've ever owned. (A HELL of a lot better than the crappy keyboard on the Dell Latitude D620 I got from my company.) Not only is it nice to type on, it's much easier to keep it clean, since bagel crumbs and hair can't fall under the keys. I also like how the keys recess when I close the lid. It's the first laptop I've ever owned that didn't eventually end up with a silhouette of the keyboard etched on the screen surface.
/. it's fine.
I still call shenanigans on the original post, however. He's afraid Linux won't work with his current hardware, so he wants to run out and buy a MacBook for OS X??? B.S.
If you like Linux, and are willing to buy new hardware, just buy a Laptop that's known to work with Linux. For that matter, it's free to try out on the hardware you have. Maybe there are no problems to worry about. Either way, problem solved.
I ***love*** OS X, but if you are not interested in certain non-Linux software (such as Apple's Garageband, which kicks all kinds of ass), then Linux is a perfectly fine choice, IMHO.
I still wouldn't recommend Linux to my white-haired aunt, but for anybody who is enough of a geek to be reading DRM arguments on
That said, if you are buying a laptop, the MacBook offers a lot of ! for the $.
The MacBook Pro is not as good of a value. It's a sensational laptop, but if you have that kind of money to throw around it might be simpler to just have desktop systems installed and waiting at every location you will ever go to.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
I don't liked being locked into a monitor with a I-mac and the mini has POS gma 950 video
Waaaa. Oh, did you know you can drive another monitor on an iMac? Probably not. Or that the iMac's LCD is a great display, especially the 24" one. Probably not.
Ok, so the Mini has a 950 video. But what is the target market? Not the gaming market. It's targeted at people who just want to run computer stuff (IE: web, word, iTunes, videos).
It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
I moderate therefore I rule!
--
"You can burn a CD and re-import it until Apple decides you can't"
BZZZZZZZT
If it was up to Apple, there wouldn't be any DRM. It's the RIAA who decides whether DRM exists and how loose it gets.
On the other hand, Microsoft, which is creating voluntary DRM laden software and files anyway, would [additionally] leverage DRM to hold your files hostage until you paid them a royalty. You think they're pandering to the RIAA now with the bendover they did with Zune? If their version of a music store ever gained significant traction, you can bet they'll sell us down the river in exchange for cash. Our cash.
Most of the stuff on
When I need to extract songs from my iPod, I have WMP add the iPod to my library and tell it to "Copy file." No hassle there!
I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
To be honest, I'd rather see no distribution at all than to see distribution with DRM.
I do agree with you though, that Apple's use of DRM has one good aspect: it provides competition to Microsft's DRM, and keeps DRM as a whole fragmented and weak. Having DRM exist at all is bad, but having Microsft DRM exist without Apple to combat it would be even worse. It's an "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" kind of thing.
I'm well aware of that, but it makes no difference whatsoever. Apple can change or remove that ability at whim, just like all the other conditions.
Look, it's this simple: between the fact that it requires permission from an external party to use your own property, has no provisions for Fair Use, and does not deactivate itself when copyright expires, DRM is inherently, absolutely, indelibly wrong. Nothing about the magnitude or "friendliness" or relative leniency of the particular implementation can change that!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
So I will go ahead and say compressing the an MP3 over and over will not create additional data loss, as long as no outside noise is added to the PCM output.
"Pardon my bluntness, but that's really no different than asking what's wrong with lethal injection because it's, by far, the least painful method of execution. But regardless of the method you're still dead, just as regardless of the DRM, you're still restricted."
Ok. This is a bad comparison. So you'd rather not kill people who, with a jury of their peers, and after appeals, everyone says should be killed. People who rape and kill little kids. Yeah....
"Wrong! You can burn a CD and re-import it until Apple decides you can't. And that mere possibility is more than enough to make it entirely unacceptable."
RIGHT! Where is your evidence to suggest that Apple is NOT going to let you do this? Hmm? Oh? Got none? Didn't think so.
"Like you, I'm happy with my iMac. However, that does not mean I think Apple can do no wrong, and neither should it mean such for you."
Apple's track record is quite good. Compare it to Microsoft. It's very good. I don't see Apple screwing around with it's EULA because it would cause a huge uproar in the user base.
It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
I moderate therefore I rule!
--
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
I think you are forgetting that, as usual, Apple LEADS. So, once again, MS is just joining a party already in progress. Also, as usual, IMHO, since they already know what everybody at the party has been drinking, they can bring the best koolaid. Sure, some will complain that it's just the Apple koolaid that has some food dye in it, but, everybody will rush to drink it anyway.
:-) or :-( depending on your position vis-à-vis Apple vs. MS and the whole DRM issue.)
(Append
"Consistency is contrary to nature, contrary to life. The only completely consistent people are the dead." A. Huxley
Google (ubuntu hardware compatibility) didn't turn up much. Where is this list of laptops that are known to work with, say, Ubuntu? Even if I try Fedora instead, what if none of the laptops on Fedora's HCL are on display at any local brick-and-mortar retailer? I don't want to waste 1,000 USD on a mail-order laptop just to find that I can't stand its internal keyboard.
but if you have that kind of money to throw around [to buy a high-end laptop computer,] it might be simpler to just have desktop systems installed and waiting at every location you will ever go to.Like buses or trains?
For one thing, a lot of Linux distributions lack a hardware compatibility list, and no local brick-and-mortar retailers (where I can try the laptop's internal keyboard) sell laptops that are advertised and warranted for use with any Linux distribution. For another, more recent peripherals come with Mac drivers than Linux drivers. If I plan on using the laptop at home as well, buying new hardware to run Linux would involve buying new peripherals to replace those that came with only Windows 2000/XP and Mac OS X drivers, such as my Microtek Scanmaker 4850 flatbed scanner, which is still listed as unsupported in SANE's hardware compatibility list.
Good luck. Most pop CDs released nowadays are over-compressed.
Only in the 16x16 pixel macroblocks containing the pixels that you changed. But MP3 audio is different because it uses overlapping transform blocks and time-varying quantizers, which aren't as amenable to the happy circumstance where JPEG DCT to 12-bit-per-channel RGB to JPEG DCT matches up perfectly.
Can you play Eve-Online on that iMac?
Yes
Then it's not a great gaming platform, sorry.
Oh. so it's not good if it does play games? Odd thinking.
Yes, I realize Microsoft is much worse than Apple in this regard. However, that doesn't mean Apple isn't bad! As an analogy, does Fidel Castro deserve praise because he wasn't as bad as Stalin?
Besides, just because Apple might not want to push DRM doesn't mean it might not be forced to more in the future. What if, as another poster mentioned, Apple got bought out by Microsoft or something? Couldn't disallowing CD-buring-and-reimporting become a very real possibility in that case? The answer is yes. Because of that, DRM is not, and never will be, a safe option. And that's regardless of Apple's attitude towards it!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
"When we first went to talk to these record companies -- you know, it was a while ago. It took us 18 months. And at first we said: None of this technology that you're talking about's gonna work. We have Ph.D.'s here, that know the stuff cold, and we don't believe it's possible to protect digital content.
What's new is this amazingly efficient distribution system for stolen property called the Internet -- and no one's gonna shut down the Internet. And it only takes one stolen copy to be on the Internet. And the way we expressed it to them is: Pick one lock -- open every door. It only takes one person to pick a lock. Worst case: Somebody just takes the analog outputs of their CD player and rerecords it -- puts it on the Internet. You'll never stop that. So what you have to do is compete with it." -- Steve Jobs
Could Apple follow Microsoft's lead to restrictive DRM? Yes.
Will they? I don't know.
Is it likely? Apple, following Microsoft? Let's ask Steve again.
Our friends up north spend over five billion dollars on research and development and all they seem to do is copy Google and Apple.
Jeez, sorry! I wasn't trying to make a social statement about the death penalty or anything; that wasn't the point. Think of it from the person-to-be-killed's perspective, or better yet, replace it with dying in your sleep. "Whether you die in your sleep, drown, get shot, or catch a horrible, painful disease, you're still dead" is the kind of argument I was trying to make.
The point was that all DRM of the same kind, so regardless of extent the end result is equally bad: you don't fully control the property you bought and paid for.
I don't need evidence! The mere fact that it's possible is enough to condemn it! Why are you having such difficulty understanding that?
Look, I agree that Apple as it is currently managed isn't likely to do this. However, there is no guarantee whatsoever that Apple will never change into something much less friendly. Some people distrust Google (despite the "do no evil" motto) simply because it can have so much access into people's private data. Some people even distrust Richard Stallman and the FSF, and refuse to use the "or any later version" clause with the GPL because RMS might somehow morph into a Gates-esque lunatic and re-write the license to take away freedom instead of preserving it. I distrust Apple because I see no legitimate reason for it to hold the keys to my own property. Is that so hard to understand?
As I just said in response to another post, that's like saying "compared to Stalin, Fidel Castro is quite good" (disregarding for a moment, Mr. Pedantic, the political merits (or otherwise) of communism). You can't just measure on a relative scale; you have to measure on an absolute one too. I agree that Apple is better than Microsoft regarding DRM, but they're both unacceptably bad compared to, say, the EFF or FSF.
Apple already screwed with the EULA once, when it reduced the number of CDs that could be burned from the same playlist. Yes, I'm aware that it raised the authorized computer limit at the same time, but that's not the point. The point is that Apple can make any change at any time, arbitrarily, and with or without your consent. And that change retroactively applies to the media you've already bought, so you have no oppertunity to opt out. Sure, maybe you liked the last change, but there's no guarantee you'll like the next.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Why "Ask Slashdot?"
The summary is already stupid. "I like Linux, but it may not work with my laptop, so I don't really want to risk it.", thus reducing x86 laptop solutions to either Vista or OSX, and inviting the loaded question. It sounds like our guy already knows what he wants the answer to be, and is just looking for some justifications to help him feel that he made the right choice.
Relax, OSX is nice. It'll probably have a bunch of DRM crap, too. Does it really matter to you? It's not like DRM is an issue for you since you discount Linux out-of-hand.
mandelbr0t
"Please describe the scientific nature of the 'whammy'" - Agent Scully
When I read " I spend most of my time writing documents and surfing the web" I concluded that this article is actually flamebait, what RDM issues would you run into exactly doing that?
I still wouldn't recommend Linux to my white-haired aunt, but for anybody who is enough of a geek to be reading DRM arguments on /. it's fine.
Though I haven't done it myself I've read on /. how others, when asked for help with a friend or relative's PC, went ahead and install a distro like Ubuntu, Kubuntu, or other distros like them and the person never looked back. Myself, about two months ago I bought a new PC with Linpire Linux preinstalled, and it looks pretty much like Windows. On the desktop you've got My Computer and My Documents however in the Launch menu you have the different programs in "Run Programs" grouped according to tasks such as "Audio and MP3", "Business and Finance", "Games", "Internet", and "Multimedia and Design". It's relatively straight forward.
The MacBook Pro is not as good of a value. It's a sensational laptop, but if you have that kind of money to throw around it might be simpler to just have desktop systems installed and waiting at every location you will ever go to.
Yea right. Not. It'd be so much easier for photographers to carry a Macbook Pro when they go out to do a shoot. I don't have a dslr yet myself but I could easily fillup a bunch or memory cards quickly, with my film slr I've shot 4 rules of 36 exposure film within a few hours, and I'm sure with a dslr I'd shoot a lot more as I wouldn't have the expense of developing film. And most of my shooting is in the outdoors. I plan on getting a MBP that's 17" within a month and the one thing I'm not happy about is that the hdds with larger space are slower.
Falcon
Ooh, and no I'm not a Mac fanboi. I'm typing this on a PC running Windows and I'm using a KVM switch to switch between this PC and a PC running linux I recently got. Actually MS is responsble for my getting a Mac for my next laptop, I want to have nothing to do with XP's or Vista's Activation or with WGA. And I just want it to work.
FalconShould there be a Law?
More importantly, if you're willing to buy new hardware in order to run OS X why wouldn't you be equally willing to buy new hardware in order to run Linux? It's possible to specifically pick a laptop that is fully compatible with Linux, you know!
Where are the brick and mortor stores where I look at and try a laptop with Linux preinstalled? I prefer to try before I buy. And how would I be able run Photoshop CS?
FalconShould there be a Law?
But see, from exactly what you said, it removes overtones that you most likely can't hear. It doesn't remove them all though. What will happen as you recompress it is that more of the overtones/harmonics will be wiped out each time you do it. Give it a try, you'll see what I mean after 5 or 6 runs if you have really good hearing. :)
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo!
So, in conclusion I'll say that Apple is much more savvy than the current incarnation of Microsoft. Ironic really, as it was in producing an OS for open, generic computers that made Microsoft great and now they are looking to have input into the specs of every component and everything that attaches to a computer that uses Windows. It's absurd, and it may well be the thing that knocks MS down a peg or two, if a company out there is smart enough to exploit this weakness.
It's MS's restrictions that have made me decide my next laptop will be Macbook Pro. If I can at all afford it I will stay away from another MS OS, XP, Vista, and what follows it, as long as MS includes Activation and or WGA.
FalconShould there be a Law?
lol I've been to over 300 DJ jobs and heard hundreds of thousands of songs played in multiple environments with multiple technologies so I know what good sound sounds like too. The loss of quality from going down a path on the circuitboard of the soundcard between the output and input processors is the same as the loss in quality when going through a circuit on the soundcard to the speaker output, and that's not even considering the cord that goes to the speaker. And since top quality music sounds fine coming out my speakers, then logically you aren't going to hear the loss in quality when you re-record it internally because it's usually less than half of a quality loss that you'd get from just playing the music out your speakers in the first place. And like the nice person who replied said, "Good thing my ears aren't an oscilloscope, otherwise I might actually be able to hear a difference!" And I didn't even mention doing it in full digital with the digital outputs and inputs, which loses even less quality!
Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
Any issues you have can be solved on linuxquestions.org. I guaruntee that you will have all of your hardware working within a month. Most of it (if not, all of it) within a week.
A couple of months ago I bought a new PC with Linux preinstalled and because the hdd it came with was only 40GB I bought a second one to install. I spent two weeks using Linuxquestions as well as Google to find out how to get Linux to recognize the second hdd before I gave up and had a geeksquad geek get it working. And as of yet I haven't been able to find out which one and how to get a double layer dvd drive to work, the PC didn't have one.
FalconShould there be a Law?
" The point is that Apple can make any change at any time, arbitrarily, and with or without your consent."
You're already reacting to something that hasn't occured and ranting accordingly... and not making complete sense. I see what you're driving at, though, so let me guess what the voices in your head are saying - you think DRM is a bad thing as most consumers do and believe that any Corporation may alter the terms of any agreement at any time, also a bad thing. Agreed. Where your ranting falls apart is the suspicion of Evil on the part of anyone touching DRM and the expectation that the worst is absolutely going to happen.
The Voices are jumpy about Apple's apparent capitulation to the RIAA to apply DRM at all. That doesn't make them all bad in my book. Certainly, Apple could have refused to create and use FairPlay at which point there would be no iTunes [Music] Store. The RIAA would say "no way, Ray" and that's a real short conversation. Apple didn't just make FairPlay for fun, it was a compromise.
DRM IS OPTIONAL in Apple land, not required. The restrictions Apple had to include for DRMed music on iTunes ONLY applies to the material bought online. It does not extend to ripped CDs, much to the displeasure of the RIAA. If you don't like DRM, rip a CD to your iTunes/iPod and shut up. There is no DRM. Rip it to MP3, AAC, WAV or AIFF if you want (just not OGG).
The big flaw I see with iTunes was restricting the number of networked connections to iTunes without regard to whether all your music is DRMed or ripped from CD. Both music types are restricted and there must be a better way. Until that's sorted out, that's a problem but I still blame the RIAA for that restriction, not Apple. Actually, I'll take that back - I'll blame the people who created software to circumvent the safety features against stolen music and the RIAA reacted by demanding a fix which affected all of us [ -thieves].
Anything short of "Pay Per Play" with variable demand pricing displeases the RIAA, so Apple has done admirably well holding off the real Evil in this equation. Apple initially included the ability to share music between computers, even over the Internet, but the RIAA has subsequently negotiated a limit on that - probably because of shared music rippers. They've also negotiated the ability to burn CDs from DRMed music with some but not all the restrictions the RIAA wanted. The RIAA has repeatedly come back at Apple to further tighten the restrictions and, for the most part, Apple has refused. You win some, you lose some but through Apple's efforts, whatever is on your iPod or iTunes is NOT DRMed if you ripped it from CD and why all music is $0.99 across the board. If the RIAA had their way... PAY PER PLAY THROUGH THE NOSE, BABY!!
However, I also sense that DRM which is not open sourced bothers you. It bothers me as well. Any technology we invest in that can be retroactively altered or obsoleted by a single entity is dangerous. There goes all your music. In the absense of a currently workable alternative which also allows the kind of access we have, I'll put my money on Apple trying their best to protect my interests. That's what I'd expect from a Liberal Hippie outfit like Apple {that was a compliment) and that's been their track record so far.
That said, I still burn a CD of whatever I buy.
Most of the stuff on
You seem to be dismissing Apple's high survey scores based on speculation that Apple's unusually passionate user-base is unfairly biasing the score in apple's favor. But the simple question comes out in all this -- why are Apple users so passionate about the product? Either you have to dismiss them as all being sheep who love surveys (an odd combination) or you need to conclude that there's something about the whole Apple product ownership experience that really does bring about that passion.
For me, I've found Apple's customer service to be no worse than any other major company, and in many cases better -- and I've had to deal with Apple service (or their authorized service centers) at least 20-30 times over the last 15 years (of course, I've tipped my hand here that I've worked supporting a bunch of macs in an business environment, but I've also helped friends and family and dealt with my own machines over the years as well.) Pretty consistently, I've found Apple employees willing to go the extra mile for me both as a business customer and as a private customer. Sure, I've had one or two less than perfect experiences, but on the whole, Apple's product quality and customer service has been great. Compare that to my experiences with Dell, Microsoft, Ford, Toyota, Subaru, Frigidaire, Sony, FedEx, UPS, Target, Marshall Fields, Amazon.com and a whole bunch more companies of size similar to or larger than Apple's, and I can honestly say that while not perfect, Apple has done better than any other large company as far as my customer service experiences go over the last 15 years, period.
So, just as you've had awful experiences with them, I've had good ones. The point is that the people who've had bad experiences can (and often do) make a lot of noise in online forums (as well they should if they think they've been wronged) but those of us who've had decent experiences rarely seek out public forums to discuss the satisfactory (or better) service. Alternatively, customer satisfaction surveys aim to get a random sampling/even cross-section of the user/consumer base and when those surveys show one company to be highly rated, consistently, that should carry more weight than anecdotal evidence from the web where a limited few are able to bias the whole discussion if they're noisy enough.
What, in particular, do you like better about Thinkpads? I'm wondering because I'm in the process of replacing my iBook G4 with a Thinkpad X60t (it's in the mail), and it would be nice to know what to expect. I just hope I'm not too annoyed by the multiple mouse buttons -- I had a Thinkpad 560X in the past, but I got used to the one-button trackpad. : )
Also, have you ever tried running the Intel version of OSX on the Thinkpad? I'm thinking of trying it with my new one...
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
What brands are you comparing it to? If you've only ever used stuff like IBM, or built it yourself, I'd expect Apple to look relatively bad because your standards are so high. If you've had experience with Emachines or something, on the other hand... <shudder>
Each time my iBook needed to be repaired, Apple sent a postage-paid box for me to pack it in, had it overnighted to their repair center, and had it back to me within a week. I'd say that's pretty good service. The closest thing I ever had to a "problem" with it was when my power board was replaced and the battery was dead afterwards. I called them up and said "you know, the battery was pretty new, and was working just fine before the power board screwed up..." and Apple replaced the battery without any argument. Yes, it would have been nice if they'd just gone ahead and done it at the same time as the power board, but it wasn't a big deal.
Oops. You said "latest version," so I skipped down to the "Version 4" part and missed the bit you quoted about 3.4.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
I'll use the word Hollywood as a catch all phrase for all of the major companies involved in producing content, either audio or video. The folks in Hollywood are all bent out of shape over their profit margins and they are seeing how easy it is for people to "share" content across the Internet in orders of magnitude significantly greater than before broadband connections became commonplace. It's one thing if you make some copies of a VHS movie and give them to your friends. It's another thing entirely for you to make your copy of a movie available to anyone with an Internet connection who can download it on a 24/7/365 basis. Be real with me, and yourself for a second... if you really have a problem with DRM it's because you want the content for free. You want to "borrow" content from your friends. You want to listen to music you'd never buy in the first place, and sure you can talk about how you pirating the music gets the band exposure, but come on... you're only kidding yourself on that one. Most of the music and movies out there cost money to be made and the people who make the content want some money for their labors. And keep in mind, its not just the "artists" that need to be paid. There are studio people, recording engineers, editors, mixers, camera operators, grips, etc, etc, etc.
In order to keep the business model alive and keep people gainfully employed Hollywood turned to DRM. From what I've read, and from my understanding of things, companies like Microsoft and Sony want their products to be the center of the "home entertainment" world. They want people to use their PCs, or their PlayStations as the singular media device that does everything media related. Hollywood doesn't want people churning out content for free so they want to protect it. Therefore an alliance has been formed. On one side you have Hollywood saying, "Okay (Microsoft/Sony/et al), we will help you realize your vision of the future and let your players play our content, BUT you need to make a good faith effort to make sure that people aren't going to rob us blind." (and whether or not you agree with the actual numbers, you'd be a fool to argue that the technology isn't there to rob Hollywood blind) On the other side of the alliance are the computer manufacturers who want people to see computers as more than computers. So they said to Hollywood, "Okay, we will protect your content. Please, let the people who buy our products see/hear the content."
Now going back to the original question of "Will Apple follow Microsoft's lead..." I don't think that's the right question. I think you need to be asking whether or not Apple sees their computers as being entertainment devices. Given the strength of the iPod market, the fact that most video editing outside of the Avid takes place on Macs, and a whole slew of other factors, I think that yes, Apple does see their computers as being strongly linked with entertainment. Because of that, I strongly believe that Apple will start integrating DRM features because they will have to if they want to offer the content to their users. The Apple users might not want DRM, but they will want their content. Just look at the way Apple markets their products. They market them to the self important, image obsessed, "Look how cool my stuff is and yours isn't" market. That market is driven and defined by Hollywood in the first place. Apple the company will play ball with those people.
I'd rather be too paranoid, than not paranoid enough. As the saying goes, "expect the worst, and you'll never be disappointed." Besides, it takes extremists like me to make moderates like you look moderate. ; )
Yes, I know. Look, I'm not saying Apple is entirely bad, and the iTunes Store's DRM isn't going to stop me from using Macs (although I am rather upset about the presence of a TPM in my iMac, and I was forced to get a Thinkpad instead of a Macbook because Apple won't make a tablet...) or even iTunes itself, but I'm not going to buy anything from the store and will encourage others to refrain from doing so also.
True, from a strategic perspective Apple is helping us, to an extent. However, it seems to me that there's "enough" people supporting Apple, that we don't really have to worry about Microsoft or the RIAA taking over any time in the immediate future. Therefore, the most important thing for me to do is remind everyone that the situation with Apple is still not optimal. If Apple started to lose out to Microsoft, with its brown-nosed pandering to the RIAA, I might indeed start encouraging people to use iTMS in order to combat that. But luckily, that day hasn't come yet.
Well yes, in a metaphorical sense. However, there can be no such thing as literal "open source DRM," because it must be closed by its very nature.
I just buy the CD to begin with. Remember, CDs are still higher quality than iTMS's AAC, and pressed CDs are more durable than burned ones.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
If you buy a song from iTunes (the only provider of FairPlay format music), there is only ONE portable device platform that you can play it on, the iPod. The key here is that you don't have a choice where to play the music, it HAS to be via Apple software and hardware.
Wrong bigtime! iTunes lets you burn music to CDs which can be played in any CD player. The only restriction iTunes has is that it doesn't allow to burn more than I believe 4 CDs with the same music in the same order and though I'm not sure I heard when burning iTunes strips metadata.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Wow. You're the first person who has ever called me a moderate. But, you're correct - it's all relative. Anyway, if I buy something from iTMS, it's for the sake of expediency. Otherwise it's a ripped CD for me.
If Apple started to lose out to Microsoft, with its brown-nosed pandering to the RIAA, I might indeed start encouraging people to use iTMS in order to combat that.To that, I'd say "make up your mind now". Would you really wait for Microsoft to start gaining traction before something is done about it or will you make sure they can never gain traction? I'd say you're hurting the cause with the discouragement. There are advantages with iTunes, like the ability to re-download all your purchased music if a fire wipes out your house. You can't do that with CDs. When asked about this myself, I'll lay out the ups and downs without using the word "evil" and let the user decide. They usually get hooked on downloading music. To the typical user, they don't know from DRM. They can throw music around on their desktops, laptops and iPods all day long and they're happy about it. It's only a problem when someone wants to "share" or if some weirdo (statistically) would rather be using an iRiver Clix.
there can be no such thing as literal "open source DRM," because it must be closed by its very nature.Open Source DRM is certainly possible. With proper encryption, the key is tagged to the user, not to the media and it's not in the source code. Everyone can look at the source code and create their own authentication system but the key to unlock purchased media is a secret which belongs to the user.
FairPlay is not open sourced or licensable because it sells iPods. That's what I hope gets changed at some point. Perhaps choose a partner like Toshiba and get some big brown iPod-like devices out there with large screens that squirt pictures. That'll nail the coffin shut, eh?
pressed CDs are more durable than burned onesThat's what I thought, except I've got a bunch of pressed CDs that are unplayable at the outer edges now (both copies of the Louis Prima Collection, Steely Dan Gold, King Teddy II (don't ask), Alice In Chains Unplugged.. etc) but all my CD-Rs dating back from 1997 are perfectly playable. No paper labels and Taiyo Yuden disks.
Most of the stuff on
Your hearing isn't as good as mine then. My point is that the loss of data gets compounded when you recompress it, and has nothing at all to do with the signal path. My point has everything to do with the simple fact of how MP3 compression works.
I don't care if you're even just running LAME on an MP3 file to recompress it without any signal path at all! There IS A LOSS OF QUALITY. That is how MP3 encoding works. It removes overtones that the human ear GENERALLY won't hear, and then does its best to recreate them at playtime. Each time you recompress it, more overtones are removed. That is a fact, that is how the compression works.
You're absolutely correct about the loss of quality in the sound hardware itself - there is hardly any at all. The loss of quality that I'm talking about is the loss of quality in the actual MP3 encoding algorithm, and there is no way at all to avoid that no matter how good your audio hardware is, as the audio hardware is completely irrelevant. I'm talking about computer programs, not audio hardware.
My apologies for trolling you as an AC earlier.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo!
That said, if you want to prepare yourself for a switch in general, the best thing to do is replace as many of your current apps with crossplatform and/or opensource apps, and open or standard file formats for all your documents- OpenOffice.org, gAIM, Firefox for more common stuff; xchat ( http://silenceisdefeat.org/~b0at/xchat/win32/ [silenceisdefeat.org] - several builds don't have the $20 fee), and so forth for less common apps. Mostly, applications are interchangeable, files may not be. You need to identify any sticking points first, before the switch- this applies to any platform.
Unfortunately there's one app that doesn't run in Linux and there is not a FOSS app that does what it does, Photoshop. GIMP is good but they're still working on a 16 bit version. Nor can it do some of what PS can do. You can run PS in Crossover Linux but not CS, only PS 7 runs well.
FalconShould there be a Law?
You say you like linux, but it you're unsure as to whether it will work on your laptop. But you say you'd be willing to buy a Macbook. Why wouldn't you be willing to buy a linux compatible laptop? There are plenty around (you have to be looking for them - but they're not that hard to come by)
How many places have laptops with Linux installed locally? Sure plenty of them can be ordered but there are some like me who want to see and try before I buy.
I currently have one of the last 12" powerbooks, fantastic machine, OSX is great, but I wish I could run linux instead (lack of 3D support, and sleep ability currently stopping me). The next machine I buy will be linux ready from the very start.
I don't have a working laptop, the LCD on my last one broke some years ago, and what I had then, been using the past few years, and what I'm using now runs Windows however because of MS's actions I plan on making my next computer, laptop, a Macbook Pro (MBP). Because the PC I'm using now is dying I went ahead and got a new tower PC running Linux a couple of months ago but I still plan on getting a MBP.
My advice: try to buy a machine which won't restrict your OS choice entirely from the start, it'll be worth it if you start itching to switch later on.
This is the reason why a MBP is the machine to get, you can run OSX, Windows, and Linux. With any machine not from Apple you can't run OSX, not without being a hacker or knowing someone who can install OSX for you.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Because Apple and Microsoft operate the infrastructures that power the only download stores that 1. sell or rent copies of works published by MAFIAA members (Sony, Vivendi, EMI, WMG, Warner, NBC Universal, Disney, Fox, and Paramount) and 2. are unquestionably legit in the developed world. If you boycott the iTunes Store, the Zune store, and all PlaysForSure stores, then you have to boycott all nine charter members of the MAFIAA. Many of us have family members whose entertainment preferences make boycotting the MAFIAA next to impossible.
So can PlaysForSure music and Zune music, with a cheap cable. But DVD players? Are you talking about most DVD players' undocumented feature to play CD-Rs containing MP3 audio files?
Maybe your point (Apple is a corporation, not an entity)Corporations are entities.
Vista is not as innovative as you think...
"Windows Vista is the only one that has a protected kernel space, encrypted memory, and randomized memory locations, keeping the user locked away from their hardware."
I. All modern OSs that run on hardware capable of it have a protected kernel space. Mac OS X has been protected mode from Day one, and BSD and Linux (with the exception of intentional ports to poor hardware, like Palm pilots) have had it since day one (1991 for Linux, 1978 for BSD).
II. Encrypted memory is not that useful, without an embedded MMU to do the encryption. The XBox 360 has this, but common Intel hardware does not. Mac OS X has supported encrypted swap and disk images for several years now, and it's common enough in CS circles to experiment with this stuff, so BSD and Linux have spported it as well. As far as code or data are concerned, without the MMU built into the chip, there's no hope of preventing other software running on the system from simply reading the information themselves, either out of plaintext pages, or out of the CPU cache itself.
Either way, encrypted memory does approximately diddly for increasing actual machine security.
III. The randomization of memory locations in Windows is intended to prevent use of a known address for functional OS routines by exploit code that is already running on the system. In other words, its intent is to simply take away access to library routines. The obvious counter to this is to not use he OS routines, and simply carry around your own. The base assumptions here are that:
(1) The attacker has successfully caused code to rune
(2) The code is running in ring 0, having already defeated everything intended to prevent it getting there
(3) The code will call system subroutines to perform work, rather than carring around its own code for e.g. strcpy()
Carry around your own code to do this work, and the target machine is just as screwed; so I'd say that all they've done is increase the size of malware, not eliminate it.
Face it: the only way to make a machine completely secure while leaving it operational is to go locked down from boot onward, and down that road lies "trusted computing", with its own ability to be abused to take rights away from the owner of the machine.
-- Terry
i have to wonder that the o.p. doesn't want to run linux because it *might* not run on tes laptop and isn't willing to risk it -- what risk? it's free. boot a livecd and find out -- but they are willing to toss their laptop entirely and buy a macbook. well watchout, cos i can guarantee that two of the mouse buttons on your osx macbook will not work. i also think kde is easier to use than osx, if you're coming from xp.
-I like my women like I like my tea: green-
I thought release early, release often was considered a good thing. Even if not, compare to Microsoft's behavior during the Windows 9x era: Windows 95 (August 1995), Windows 95 OSR2, Windows 98, Windows 98 Second Edition, Windows Millennium Edition, and Windows XP (December 2001), released within 76 months.
Want true random numbers on any computing platform? Read blocks of 128 samples from the microphone input, and apply MD5 to each. This will pick up on the thermal noise in the ADC plus the acoustic noise in the room.
Yea, I'm kind of supprized Apple doesn't make tablets. I'd get one myself, long as it was big like the 17" MBP which I plan to get.
FalconShould there be a Law?
My own personal machines haven't really been problematic, except for every Mac I've owned. From 'logicboard failures' (In all the years I've been using computers, I've never had a motherboard just 'fail' except when it came to mac) to the wireless card just dying a few days after I got it (and then Applecare trying to dodge dealing with it).
I've had the opposite experience to your's. I've bought two Macs used and four new PCs running Windows. My first Mac was an SE30 I bought in used in 1992. It lasted until 2000 when the floppy died. Several months later I bought another used Mac, this one's a Power Mac 7300/200. It died in January 2006, early this year, when it didn't bootup. These were the only problems I ever had with either Mac.
However it's a different story with the four new PCs I bought. The first one was a laptop I bought from Gateway in 1997. About 6 months after I got it the hdd died and had to be replaced. Then 2 weeks before I had it a year it refused to bootup and Gateway arranged to have it picked up and sent into the service center. To make the story short the motherboard had to be replaced. The third PC was another Gateway laptop I got in early 2000. It's LCD cracked three months after I got it. The fourth one, which I'm typing this on, is an HP Pavillion I got in later in 2000. Like the first laptop, it's hdd and motherboard had to be replaced in the first year. Altogether I've replaced or installed three hdds, the motherboard, and a graphics card on the HP. This leaves out one PC, my second. I got it at the same tyme as the first laptop, in 1997. It has a DEC Alpha cpu and is from Microway running NT 4. It is the only compatible PC I haven't had hardware trouble with, however because the cpu is an Alpha I wasn't able to get much software installed on it so I haven't used it much, and not at all in the past few years. Now I'm hoping to find a Linux distro I can install on it.
In all, I've bought 2 used Macs which lasted me several years before dying and 4 new PCs three of which had hardware problems within a year. From my personal experience I'd definitely say Macs are more reliable than other PCs.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Or are you arguing that their attempts at "control" are intentionally flawed?
Of course they are - they are minimal by design and so being just enough to keep honest people honest, something Steve Jobs has said all along. Stopping music piracy is a social and education issue, not a technical one.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Windows Media has hacks and tools to easily remove the DRM like FairUse4WM, and what THOSE tools do is actually strip off the DRM leaving you with an unprotected WMA file.
... If you have any solid evidence that Yahoo! developed this service due to pressure from Apple, I'd like to see it. Please explain why Apple isn't offering unprotected MP3s on their store if they are truly the ones pushing this.
And ITMS users had Harmony long before that thanks.
I do not know what this means. You simply cannot convert a downloaded protected video to DVD-Video in iTunes
Any screen recording software will record it - one such example s SnapzPro. I'm sure we'll have an equivilent program to strip the DRM off it soon anyway.
While iTunes recognizes ID3 tags, it actually strips them off MP3 files you import to iTunes and dumps the metadata into it's own proprietary database at the same time mangling the file names.
It does not strip the file, it reads it - and altering the name is a choice you can configure. Learn to use software before you critize the abilities it offers.
The music industry hates Apple passionately because they percieve Apple as having "screwed them" on iTunes. Read some of my other posts on this issue. More importantly, the big labels are deathly afraid of one player (Apple) dominating the online music industry the way MTV dominates music videos.
Of course Apple is not directly pressing for this - it is the pressure from them, that you admit to in your own writing, that drives the only response possible to break free of Apple - unprotected files being sold. That is how DRM works, one company grabs a stranglehold over the market and everyone else is beholden to them. By Apple grabbing this hold and then leveraging it against the labels they have forced the lables into only one possible course of action going forward to seek the other freedoms they desire - and that is unrestricted files being sold. The other option of course is death, which may occur instead - with eMusic and companies like it rising up as the new labels of choice. If that happens then Apple can and will drop DRM, they will be forced to in order to compete.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
BZZZZZZZT
If it was up to Apple, there wouldn't be any DRM. It's the RIAA who decides whether DRM exists and how loose it gets.
Apple fanboys keep saying this, and I don't understand why. How come I can't load up songs from iTMS on a non-Apple player? How come the iPod doesn't work with most over music stores out there? The answer is DRM, and it doesn't have anything to do with the RIAA. Apple wields DRM as a tool to try to lock people in just like Microsoft does.
Because it would have meant adopting a competely proprietary solution for the store from Microsoft - both the audio file format AND the DRM are proprietary. That's too dangerous for words. Just ask all the other music stores that used WMA "Plays For Sure". Heh... They're screwed!
If you really want to buy from the iTunes Store, you can burn a CD and re-encode it to whatever the hell you want. Make it a lossless codec and you haven't lost anything. Otherwise, buy a CD and rip that.
How come the iPod doesn't work with most over music stores out there?Who cares? It's mostly the same damned library anyway. Otherwise, buy a CD and rip that.
The answer is DRM, and it doesn't have anything to do with the RIAA.DRM has EVERYTHING to do with the RIAA, no matter who issues it.
Apple wields DRM as a tool to try to lock people in just like Microsoft does.Only on the iTunes Store. The iPod was first and foremost an MP3 player and still is. iTunes is first and foremost a CD ripper, music library organizer, iPod manager and audio CD burner. The iTunes Store came much later and is a different animal working with the permission of the RIAA. That's the only place you'll find DRM and it's because of the RIAA. Apple won't license FairPlay as a tool for lock-in but they can do that since they own the whole ecosystem. We don't have to like it and they don't have to care. AAC is a published standard and they aren't beholden to anyone else's DRM or usage model. It's up to you to buy in or go away.
Most of the stuff on
Meh. The keyboard comment came from personal experience. I'm writing this on an Inspiron E1505, which is a fine keyboard. I keep it clean of food mostly by not eating at my computer.
MacBook keyboards hurt like hell to type on. I had to use my roommate's to type up a paper for class last semester. My hands hurt afterwards. There's not enough give and they just don't feel right.
My Inspiron cost (after some phone haggling) $850 or so. An equivalent PowerB--er, sorry, MacBook Pro--would be about $2000. I see a slight problem there. I'd buy an Intel MBP, though (and promptly put Windows and Linux on it) if it had two mouse buttons and the old PowerBook trackball.
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
I can hear the difference but I don't care, and I do use a higher bit rate to recompress.
The chief problem with doing the audio I/O loop is that you can hear everything going on inside the computer. Put a good amplifier on a computer analog output and crank it up (just don't blow your brains out with an alert sound). Some machines sound like an R2 unit convention in there, especially if you start launching stuff.
Now, if you had an optical digital I/O (all currently shipping Macs including laptops have optical digital I/O), you wouldn't even be scaling the signal or doing D/A-A/D conversion. Haven't tried it myself but that would do the trick.
Most of the stuff on
Haha, I like the comparison to an R2 unit convention. Yea, the digital I/O would solve one problem but it wouldn't solve the problem of recompressing it.
Speaking of R2 units, it's always good fun when I'm recording and my cell phone starts doing its thing because I forgot to turn the transmitter off.
Bzzt bzzt. bzt. bzzzztt. "CRAP!"
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo!
I can think of 5 other Macs I've been somewhat responsible for maintaining, which haven't had significant problems.
The experiences divide cleanly into three categories:
We Apple zealots may downplay the anecdotes of horrible things happening with {Macs, AppleCare, Apple}. But they are simply anecdotes, and the publicity of a problem has no correlation whatsoever with how much of a problem it actually is (as any Slashdotter should be able to attest) (i.e. anecdotes != data). As someone else pointed out, if we are sufficiently satisfied with Macs to defend Apple, we're, uh, satisfied? That's kinda hard to argue.
and lastly, for contrast, I've had plenty of experiences with PCs failing just as mysteriously/frequently/whateverly as my Macs have, if not more.
Yeah, it really takes a special kind of brilliance (where the meaning of "special" is not a benevolent one) to come up with the idea of shoving auto-reboot down people's throats as a method to encourage them to apply patches. A utility that would make it easy and convenient for me to update my system, and that would remind me to do so at the proper time, would be great. But Microsoft's idea of "convenient" is... Well, think Clippy. Instead of allowing me to check for updates just before the system shuts down, they want to do so when it starts up. So rather than allow me to click a button to let the update take care of itself as I walk away from my computer with my business done for the day, I would have to add an additional reboot cycle to the time I have to wait to use my computer. The result is that I often go days without applying security patches (Yes, my own damn fault, I know, but that does not excuse the tool.)
It really sucks to be consistently interrupted from a full screen fast-action game by a dialog threatening to bring down my system if I do not actively opt out. And the same people go out of their way to bring us popup spam integrated into the OS API. I do not want to see "Help make office better!" spring up over my powerpoint presentation at random intervals, nor do I appreciate the fact that I have to click the tiny X to get rid of this window, and if they miss I incur the wrath of more dialogs.
And to think that they almost made the Vista sound effect mandatory is even more disgusting.
The fact that Microsoft promotes such "features" is evidence of one of the following: A) That these people lack even the slightest respect for the user experience (sometimes I wonder if this is actually intentional, and if they're mocking me for kicks); or B) That they are so caught up in an intra-company bureaucracy that they are incapable in general of making intelligent design decisions.
I wonder if KDE 4's port to Windows will include kwin.
Evidently, the key to understanding recursion is to begin by understanding recursion. The rest is easy.
(HP dv6000t vs Apple MacBook Pro 15.4". Same CPU, RAM, drives, screen size, remote/mic/camera, etc.; weight within 1/2 lb, dimensions within 1/2 inch; the HP has a lower screen resolution, but an extra USB port and better DVD burner.) And what is wrong with iTunes? It has, by far, the fairest DRM. You can burn unlimited copies of the music (you are limited to a certain number per playlist, but you can make a new Playlist and do more). You can always burn a CD, and re-import it. That's true for music, but have you had a look at the DRM for videos from the iTunes store? Good luck getting those to play with anything other than QT Player and iPod, or giving them away as gifts without handing over your account password.
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
I think you misunderstand -- I don't want to see Apple get a strong monopoly an more than I do Microsoft. The best possible situation, aside from them both going out of the DRM business (which is pretty damn unlikely, unfortunately), is to play them off each other for as long as possible.
You can't do it with the iTunes store, either! When you buy a song from iTunes, you get one chance to download it. If you lose the file and want a new copy, you get to pay for it all over again. Don't tell me you weren't aware of this! (You were, right?)
Re-read that, and you'll see it doesn't make any sense. The point of DRM is to hide the user's key from himself, so that he can only unlock the song under certain conditions chosen by a third party. If "the key to unlock purchased media is a secret which belongs to the user," it fails as DRM because the user can just unlock it any time he wants.
Remember, the purpose of encryption is to pass a message from Alice to Bob without Charlie having access to it. But with DRM, Bob and Charlie are the same person, which already makes it theoretically impossible. Nevertheless, it can "sort of" work by trying to hide as much as possible from Bob as well, but if you give Bob all the information (e.g. the source code) that whole idea falls apart.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Are you sure you replied to the right post? You're arguing on the same side as me!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Not to mention, horrible assembly like too much thermal paste, high pitch noises (be it from the PSU, graphics card, monitor, motherboard or even a combination) -- I have sensitive hearing, hardware getting too hot to touch. These are things I would expect maybe from a system that was just put together on the spot without really thinking.We don't even have eMachines, Gateway here (here being Poland)... We have Dell, Sony stuff, but while it's possible to get their stuff, it's rare that one would ever see it -- even in shops.
Main big brands here: Optimus, HP, Compaq, Toshiba, Asus, Acer (Most people haven't even heard of a Mac).
Each time I had my PowerBook sent to be repaired, few times it got 'lost' when it was sent to them... Found later... Then they would just send it back unrepaired. No message or anything.
It would be difficult to get anything repaired as they continuously didn't want to acknowledge there was a issue at all -- this happened too often. As for repair times... I think every time I sent something, it took at least two weeks to get it back.
On another note, the local shop lets me get things repaired usually within the same day =)
To be honest, I'm surprised you and the others who have posted here did have decent support from Apple. I've had 100% of time bad service. Not only that, but there are others I know of that have had very similar experiences to me.
I have been really patient with Apple, accepting a lot of things as "it can happen anywhere" sort of issues. But this has been 100% of my usage of Apple products and Apple services.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Oh, maybe that's it! It's entirely possible that the reason we've had such different experiences is that Apple's service in the US (where I am) is much better than its service in Europe.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
My Inspiron cost (after some phone haggling) $850 or so. An equivalent PowerB--er, sorry, MacBook Pro--would be about $2000.
"Equivalent" MacBook Pro!? What are you smoking?
The E1505 looks a lot like a MacBook, with a few missing features.
Also, Dell lists it at $1219. You must have bought a used or refurb model off eBay or something. Froogle reported one available on eBay for $899
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Holy crap, I just noticed that your E1505 is not even a Core 2 Duo, like what is standard on all current MacBooks, Pro and otherwise.
So, while you are fantasizing that your Inspiron offers the value of a MacBook Pro for less money, it is, in fact, inferior to the bottom-of-the-line regular MacBook.
But hey, you saved $200 by buying a slower laptop with a lower-quality LCD, and it has a keyboard which you (strangely) like better. Good for you.
The closest thing Dell offers to the home market to the MacBook Pro is the "XPS M1710", which they sell for $2,299. Your Inspiron, with it's slower CPU and lack of dedicated GPU memory, is not in the same category as the Pro or the XPS.
Personally, I use the MacBook keyboard for hours on end, and my hands don't hurt at all. I actually type a little faster on my MacBook than I do on the Dell I sometimes use at work. Like I said, it's the nicest keyboard I ever owned. Is there something odd about your typing habits which may have been causing your hands to hurt?
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
They get a pass because they've designed it weak enough that it doesn't matter for most people. I still don't like it myself but the alternative was Microsoft to "own" DRM and fulfill the every wish of the RIAA in regards to music pricing and distribution online. Since I actually like paying for music, I prefer the world we are now in where options for DRM free music s opening up simply because Apple will not play ball with the only DRM consumers are accepting.
What's a load of rubbish is your insistence this is not happening, when it's already happened and is growing! Not being able to spot trends already in progress much less when they are nascent is a very bad state for any kind of technology worker to be in.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
h, see, I'd want a 12", 4lb (or less!) one, like the X60 I got (which was specifically due to the fact that it's the lightest convertible tablet with a reasonably-sized screen, except for the old X41).
I wouldn't mind carrying a 10 lb laptop, as long as the lcd is big, it's relatively fast, and has a big hdd amoung other things. If I can't backpack with a 10 lb laptop after backpacking and bike riding with 50+ lbs then I might as well hang it up.
I guess Apple would have to make two tablets, one for each of us, which might explain why it doesn't make any.
I don't see that as a problem afterall Apple makes what 4 different sized laptops, 12", 13", 15" and 17". They could do the same with tablets. I've been thinking about getting a Watcom tablet when I get the MBP but I'd really love to get a laptop with one builtin. On the other hand though, built in the size would be whatever size the laptops come in whereas Watcom makes bigger tablets.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Why not get the 21" laptop and just run Linux on it. Gphoto works with most any camera, since it supports PTP. Is there any particular functionality specific to the Mac that you need?
First I don't know if Linux will run on it, and I'm not going to buy something that expensive when I won't know if I can use it until I buy it. As for functionality, well amend that to apps then, I am seriously thinking of getting Photoshop CS. Sure I could run PS in Crossover Linux but the last version of PS that has been tested and works in Crossover is PS 7 which is old. And there are no graphics or photo editors, commercial or FOSS, with the capabilities of PS that runs in Linux. And no, GIMP isn't a replacement for PS for photographers. And I am a photographer, amateur right now but I'm hoping to become a professional photographer. As it is now that's about the only thing I could do work wise that I enjoy, I'm a TBI, Traumatic Brain Injury, survivor and am on disability.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Nor do I, but they have it for now. So far, Apple has used their de-facto monopoly to keep our prices down and preserve as much freedom as they can against the wishes of the RIAA. They've also signed thousands of Indie labels to potentially end run the RIAA once and for all. The RIAA knows not to push Apple because Steve Jobs will simply find a different model for music distribution and it won't include them. They'll be very broke, very fast. Of course, that will bring the other Apple Music lawyers around again, but that's another thread.
Nullifying the RIAA won't solve the "stealing music" business so DRM in some shape is going to be with us for a while - at least until the honor system for payments to artists takes hold. That said, I agree that any entity with a strong monopoly for a high demand item is a bad thing (see: RIAA, OPEC etc.).
In this digital age, how does something intangible, like music and movie files, get tagged to the rightful "owner"? If it were up to the RIAA, there would be no physical media to "own" nor any files to freely toss around the Internet. That pretty much limits the options. What about a physical key like a DirecTV style card which fits into your playback items? Fingerprint readers? Retnal scans? Given the options, FairPlay DRM doesn't seem so bad at this point but there has to be a better solution that won't dissolve "fair use" like we're seeing now.
You can't do it with the iTunes store, either! When you buy a song from iTunes, you get one chance to download it. If you lose the file and want a new copy, you get to pay for it all over again.It's actually an Apple policy within the last year to let you do that ONCE:a pple_gave_me_b.html - lets-people-re-download-all-your-music-once/
http://wilwheaton.typepad.com/wwdnbackup/2006/09/
http://thecontent.wordpress.com/2006/05/24/itunes
After that, get a clue and BACK UP!
The point of DRM is to hide the user's key from himselfAhh... minor detail... yes, they don't want the user to strip the DRM from the music file itself. But there are Open Source DRM projects going on right now. A quick Google search will reveal several such projects.
I agree that DRM is evil and all and that DRM should not be in the hands of one controlling entity. However, we're actually battling the RIAA and they've got control of the music we want. I'm just thankful it's not the RIAA's brand of DRM. The RIAA is the problem and so are the people who want to steal music. DRM is the key to some level of trust and the source of the uneasy truce between the RIAA and the consumer. Any breach of that "trust" between RIAA and FairPlay will weaken Apple's position next time negotiations come around so it's in Apple's best interest to break jhymn and other DRM crackers. Otherwise, the RIAA will be able to leverage Apple just like it bent Microsoft over. Everyone is theorizing that Microsoft is taking an innovative approach to the RIAA and paying them a royalty for every player sold. Since when does Microsoft pay royalties to anyone? I think the RIAA demanded that as the cost of entry because they dont' trust Microsoft or their technology. The RIAA has been yelling about royalties on players for years. They missed the boat on Apple but they got Microsoft.
Most of the stuff on
The fact that you put quotation marks around "owner" suggests that you know the answer already: that the whole concept of ownership of intangible stuff doesn't make sense. That's the reality of the situation, and sooner or later it's going to have to come out.
Having to beg Apple for it doesn't count in my book, especially since it appears not to be an "official" policy (i.e. one explicitly mentioned in the iTunes store user agreement).
Well, I guess I just don't understand how it works, then.
"Stealing music" is a problem solved by mall security guards. Copyright infringment, on the other hand, is certainly not a black-and-white moral issue like stealing is. Assuming that they're the same thing blatantly ignores several aspects of the issue, such as the fact that when copyright is infringed nothing is lost except an "oppertunity" or "possibility," or the chance that maybe sharing the work would be a greater net benefit to society than giving the author a monopoly would have been.
Remember, stealing is prohibited on the basis that ownership of tangible property is a Natural Right, while copyright infringment is only prohibited because we theorize that it's contrary to the purpose of "promoting the progress of science and the useful arts." If it turns out that other means can satisfy that purpose better than copyright -- which could very well be true, considering the success of the Free Software movement, Creative Commons, YouTube, etc. -- then what possible justification would we have for criminalizing sharing?
My theory is that Microsoft is willing to pay royalties on the Zune specifically to screw over Apple, by setting a precedent that the RIAA will try to apply to the iPod.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
"if you really have a problem with DRM it's because you want the content for free"
DRM is not about keeping people who oppose DRM from getting the content for free. The people who oppose DRM are, in general, more than capable of bypassing any DRM scheme that's even vaguely likely to get accepted by the paying public. And the people who promote DRM should be quite aware of this. If they don't want to believe the likes of Cory Doctorow, even Steve Jobs has told them that DRM doesn't work, and that the people who want the content for free will always be able to get it. Here's Steve: "When we first went to talk to these record companies -- you know, it was a while ago. It took us 18 months. And at first we said: None of this technology that you're talking about's gonna work. We have Ph.D.'s here, that know the stuff cold, and we don't believe it's possible to protect digital content."
"It's another thing entirely for you to make your copy of a movie available to anyone with an Internet connection who can download it on a 24/7/365 basis."
Yep, that's just one of the many reasons DRM doesn't work: "What's new is this amazingly efficient distribution system for stolen property called the Internet -- and no one's gonna shut down the Internet. And it only takes one stolen copy to be on the Internet. And the way we expressed it to them is: Pick one lock -- open every door. It only takes one person to pick a lock. Worst case: Somebody just takes the analog outputs of their CD player and rerecords it -- puts it on the Internet. You'll never stop that. So what you have to do is compete with it."
"Everything that I know about DRM I have learned from reading Slashdot and the articles that are linked to this site."
You've been doing some VERY selective reading, friend, if you've missed this.
DRM is about giving strangers intimate control over my computer. We're talking about people I don't know and who I have every reason not to trust access to anything on my computer with no way for me to tell what they're doing. Yes, really, that's what strong DRM means... it means that *I* am not 'root' when it comes to my own financial records or anything else I have on my computer, the MPAA is, because to make it work the DRM protected components have to be (a) outside my ability to examine and expose, and (b) able to examine everything else on my computer to make sure I'm not backdooring them. Anything weaker is no better than "honor system". This is a right you wouldn't give to the Federal Government if they can't get warrant, and you're giving it to some random yobbo who works at Universal? And for what? For making it a little less convenient for moderately dishonest people to get free movies.
DRM is about making it a little less convenient for moderately dishonest people to get free copies of digital content. Anyone who really cares will still be able to get it from a P2P service, from usenet, from a drop box on some FTP server, from this amazingly efficient distribution system for stolen property called the Internet as Steve Jobs calls it.
The US had a revolution over less. And you want to give in because you think (incorrectly) that it'll keep persons unknown from being able to rob Hollywood blind? You're giving up your freedom for a mess of pottage, and you're not even the one who gets the soup? And you say our perception is a bit skewed?
Wow. Just, wow.
The iTunes Store came much later and is a different animal working with the permission of the RIAA. That's the only place you'll find DRM and it's because of the RIAA. Apple won't license FairPlay as a tool for lock-in but they can do that since they own the whole ecosystem.
Which is precisely my point. People try to pretend that Apple is pro-consumer and only reluctantly implemented DRM at the demands of the RIAA. But fact is, Apple uses the Fairplay DRM to suit their needs too.
Where did I say it was a stock E1505?
And if you call them, their prices go way down, very quickly.
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
People like you and me are not most people; "most people" are stuck with it.
People like you and me are free to transcode without loss - "most people" can simply burn and rip a CD, yes with a loss in quality but "most people" would not notice or care about the slight degradation.
What does Microsoft's DRM do that Apple's doesn't?
it doesn't always work the same. That was more true in the past, which is how Apple achieved dominance. A further key aspect is remote revocation - once an Apple computer is authorized it can play songs forever without a network connection. This is not true of much music stored using Microsoft DRM. This remote killswitch is one of the very most objectionable aspects of DRM.
Options for DRM free music are not opening up.
eMusic grows monthly, Barenkaed Ladies sell all concerts and albums online in either MPE or FLAC, major labels are starting to sell music in plain MP3. Close your eyes as long as you like, the world is changing.
Consumers don't accept Apple's DRM. They accept the iPod. They put up with Apple's DRM, which is the only legal (digitally purchased) music they can use in their iPod.
See above for other alternatives.
Apple is only getting a pass because you're invested in their system.
Not really, I've only bought a few songs from ITMS and prefer to rip CD's for quality.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
So? iPods were selling like hotcakes before and after DRM. Who cares? Don't use iTunes and come up with a better system. The world is waiting. I say use RFID implants where your music only plays within 30 feet of your body.
Everyone forgets about Apple holding off higher prices. The RIAA wanted $2.95 for hot tracks and Apple told them to bugger off (Microsoft would have split the profits with the RIAA by now). Apple also had to make concessions to the RIAA or there would be no iTunes store. A business deal isn't good until both parties are equally unhappy. Same goes for you.
On top of that, in the last 5 years of the iPod, Apple has released one slick improvement over another in the face of almost NO competition. If it were Microsoft's baby (for instance), they would have achieved market dominance and then stopped ANY improvements (see IE, XP and everything else they make). If the Zune had come out 5 years ago and hit like the iPod, we'd still be using the same damned hardware.
Most of the stuff on
you might also want to check out Inkscape for vector based design stuff. Render to a high-res transparent
Yea I've got Inkscape bookmarked and may give it a try once I have my computer setup. I've also got Render and several other graphics programs I plan to investigate to see if they will go what I'd like so I won't need Photoshop. One I'd love to tryout is Maya though it does 3D rendering and is not a photo editor.
You should also download the newest version of Ubuntu burn it to a CD
The new PC with Linspire came with a LiveCD so I may try that on the HP. I've also been thinking of setting up the new PC as a dualboot machine, install Ubuntu and keep Linspire.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Where did I say it was a stock E1505?
Okay, so what is it?
Wait. Don't bother telling me. I wouldn't want you to type any more than necessary with those ultra-delicate hands of yours.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Heh. I was about to head out, hence the terse reply. It doesn't quite match up with the $1999 MBP of today, granted, but it's on par with the MBP of the time I purchased it--I did a side-by-side with a friend's MBP's spec list, and the variance wasn't huge.
-Core Duo 1.83GHz (Core 2 hadn't come out yet and the MBP had, IIRC, the same processor)
-2GB RAM
-60GB hard drive. Divided in thirds between Linux, Windows, and a shared partition. I could have gone with a bigger hard drive, but I carry an external anyway, so I felt like saving a few bucks.
-15.4-in. display without the shitty gloss screen--matte all the way
-ATI Mobility Radeon X1400 (best offered when I bought the machine)
-DVD burner, don't recall the speed offhand
Similar CPU speed, more RAM, two more USB ports. Two are in an odd place, though, on the right side of the chassis, where I'd expect them to be on the left, same side as the CD/DVD drive. Makes them a bit inconvenient, but usable in a pinch. It also has a Ricoh SD/MMC slot. One thing that was odd about this when I bought it was that there is no separate line-in and microphone jack; the on-board software detects a plug's insertion and asks the user if it's a microphone or line-in. That software doesn't work under Linux, but it serves as a perfectly normal microphone adapter.
That E1505 cost me $850 after a rebate and haggling with their phone staff. I did also get it during a promotion where the RAM upgrade was free. An MBP costs $1999. Even today, in a side-by-side comparison with a new MBP, I'd be hard-pressed to see what in the machine would be worth $1100 more.
I'll admit that the lighted keyboard is cool, and I'm tempted to hardware-hack my own into this one when I get a new keyboard (the keys are smoothing and wearing down due to use), though I likely won't. But OS X, a lighted keyboard, and a miserable-resolution camera certainly aren't worth that much money.
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
Sorry, still haven't had a chance to try Eve-online, but I'll get back to you. I recently installed all the latest crop of racing sims, and I'm freakin' amazed at my fps rates. I'm consistently at 100 fps or higher, which is plenty good for me. Doom III runs much better on my iMac than it does my 2.5 P4 with a much better video card (invidia GeForce something or other). It isn't even playable on my PC at certain points of the game. So my contention still stands...the intel iMacs are very good gaming machines. I doubt I could build my own pc for any cheaper to get the same results, since I already tried this once 15 months ago. I haven't looked, but I bet I can find a website in less than 5 minutes that shows how to swap out the built in graphics card on the iMac, so in three years or so, I don't see that being a problem. I upgraded the video card in my friend's second generation iMac way back in the day, and that was supposedly not possible, so I'm sure I'll be able to do it again.
Many people were afraid of the Intel switch because of the potential of adding far-reaching DRM. And indeed, the first Intel Macs had TPM (Trusted Computing) chips built into the motherboards. However, while there is a TPM driver in OS X, it is not actually being used by anything (not even iTunes DRM). And, in fact, starting with the MacPro, it appears that Apple is no longer including the TPM chip in their systems.
For the curious, you can actually use the TPM chip from user space. A great article about TPM and how Apple uses it (and how you can use it yourself) can be found at:
http://www.osxbook.com/book/bonus/chapter10/tpm/
Yomigaeru Aiyan Geek!!!
Who said I needed to reply to only posts I disagree with? ;-)