Slashdot Mirror
Beware the Apple iPhone iHandcuffs
Nrbelex writes "Randall Stross makes a fresh and surprisingly accurate review of one of the biggest "features" in the upcoming iPhone and the iPod in general, 'fairplay'. Stross writes, 'If "crippleware" seems an unduly harsh description, it balances the euphemistic names that the industry uses for copy protection. Apple officially calls its own standard "FairPlay," but fair it is not.... You are always going to have to buy Apple stuff. Forever and ever.' Can mainstream media coverage help the battle over DRM or will this warning, like those of the pas, continue to go unnoticed?"
There's nothing new for a Slashdotter here.
Now if I could just get my wrist to be shaped more like an apple, I'd never have to worry about someone stealing my iPhone.
Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
I really don't understand the repeated efforts here to brand Apple as the devil over "FairPlay". I'm no fan of DRM, and don't use it because it's entirely unnecessary. I've bought about 6 songs and one video off of iTunes in the last 3 years. I just don't get the freedom-threatening nature of ripping my own CDs.
The revolution will NOT be televised.
I guess it was always gunna happen at some point. They've had such a hit with iTunes and the iPod with their own audio format...
I think therefore I am... a Linux geek.
No matter how sexy or cool things seemed early on, the day will come when you will wonder what the fuck you were thinking.
stop stealing and pay up...
sick of iphone bashing. Nobody has asked to buy iphone unlike MS windows. If you don't like it, then don't buy. Windows... I had to buy to open *.doc.
As far as I'm considered, this is a stupid argument. Slam Sony instead. How about a $400 DVD plaver that won't play MP3 file.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
Only Apple can sell the razor and the blades at a premium.
The iPhone is mentioned in the first paragraph and in the headline, perhaps to grab the reader's attention. The rest of the article is about the DRM restrictions in music purchased from iTunes. While this will also apply to the iPhone (as it includes iPod functionality) I really can't see why this article is remotely interesting or newsworthy. I was expecting to read something about the 3rd party software lock-in on the iPhone, but there really is nothing to see here.
phozz
So people want to force Apple to make Microsoft formats work on the iPod? Those same people blame Apple for iTunes purchased songs not working on a Zune as well? I don't get the double standard. If Apple should be forced to make iPods play Microsoft DRM, then isn't it the responsibility of Microsoft to make Apple's FairPlay work on Zunes? I think I'll go buy a Zune then sue Microsoft because my iTunes songs don't work on the Zune. I hope this case gets thrown out and the woman has to pay the court costs.
I read the NYT article, and this is really not a new issue, is it? The iPod has had this issue, as did Apple's previous foray into cellphones (the ROKR and now the RAZR). The bigger challenge the iPhone faces is that, according to Steve Jobs, 3rd party developers won't be able to write programs for the iPhone without Apple's blessing and distribution channels. That's a product killer, given that the most popular smartphones already on the market (especially those running PalmOS and Windows Mobile) are tremendously extensible via 3rd party offerings. It's also a huge mistake. Having a phone that plays music isn't a revolution; it's a necessity these days. Heck, the phones that are being given away by the carriers can all play MP3s at least. Rather, anyone spending as much as Apple wants for the iPhone (even before locking in a data plan from Cingular) is going to want to do whatever he or she can imagine with the iPhone in all aspects of life, not just music or telephoning. That will require 3rd party developers. Apple should embrace 3rd party development, since it will sell many more iPhones, rather than the current strategy.
Personally, I was pondering how to make the business case for an iPhone at work until I read about the current 3rd party app limitation. As someone who's used the PalmOS for 10 years, I am *not* going back to one-vendor sourced apps. {Prof. Jonathan Ezor, PalmAddict Associate Writer}
Apple had to produce a DRM that was acceptable to the music industry, or else iTunes would never exist. MP3 players would still be gimmicks, much like minidisk players, and the advances we have seen across all brands of MP3 players never would have happened. Instead, Apple came up with a solution that appeased the music industry, and which doesn't remove that many rights from consumers. The really brilliant thing Apple did was allow FairPlay to be so easily cracked by burning the music to CD's. I find it interesting that the article complains about Apple locking in consumers, but the far more interesting thing is how they have locked in the music industry. The music industry would love to raise prices, make all services subscription, and restrict our rights in more and more ways. Instead, Apple is strong enough that not only can it maintain the status quo (which they improved by allowing us to buy single songs, instead of CD's with a decent song and 9 crappy ones), they are extending it to other music labels and now movies. They have created a means for more independent artists to make a living without giving into the labels (not as good as eMusic, true, but they had to give up something to get the major labels.), allowed consumers to buy music ala carte, and are changing the face of the industry. There are the vocal few who claim that all DRM is evil, and refuse to buy anything from the music labels. I admire both your stance and your dedication to it. However, most of the public do not understand the issues, and they provide enough revenue for the labels to ignore you. Apple is a middle ground now. Hopefully in the future, we will be able to move to an even better situation. However, without this middle ground, we would all be talking about buying music in a hopelessly outdated, unfair manner, or stealing it.
http://bgcommonsense.blogspot.com
Though I'm not a fan of DRM, and I generally avoid the iTunes store because I'm not sold on 128kbps sound files, this is their choice. If people want to play iTunes store songs on other digital media players, then they can work around it by burning CDs, or they can obtain the music some other way. Unfortunately, one of those ways is piracy, which Apple surely knows. I hate to be the person that says "they are making a business decision," but in a sense, they are. It makes sense for them to keep their users "locked in" to the iPod/iPhone/iWhatever line. And quite honestly, most people don't know about DRM's specifics, nor do they care. What do they do? Buy an iPod, if they didn't already have one. Techy people get upset, but I really doubt the techy people are the market in this case. I DJ using a digital solution and I prefer 320kbps mp3s to balance size and sound quality. I don't buy from iTunes store almost at all, because it's not what I'm looking for. Over and done with. It does seem to me a bit unfair to complain, as the lady does, about her other music players not playing iTunes store stuff. The flip is that people who use those media players aren't going to buy from the iTunes store -- bad for Apple. OR they buy an iPod. Good for Apple! There are still trade-offs involved. I dislike DRM. But for all the fuss, it's never really got to my nerves very much, and I buy more music in formats from mp3 to cd to good old vinyl records. I primarly buy digital music. People are not entitled to DRM-free music from iTunes store. It's part of the bargain. And as long as people see it worth it to buy a low quality m4a file with DRM, which 2 billion purchases suggest they do, then what's all the fuss?
You can easily fill up an iPod or iPhone with non-DRM music. Just rip it yourself. In fact, throughout the keynote Jobs used Beatles music (rubbing their nose in it, I guess) and those albums he showed are not available on iTunes. Apple has improved the ripping experience by providing album art for ripped tunes. Granted, FairPlay is hardly fair to Apple competitors. I wish that if Apple continues using it they would at least make it an open standard so we could have a level DRM field, but I don't expect Apple to support other DRM schemes, even when their own creators (MS anyone?) seem to abandon them, for sure.
The article does make a good point, though. If a label is willing to let its music out on eMusic without DRM, and even willing to let Apple have it for iTunes without DRM, then why does Apple not post it on iTunes without FairPlay? I'd guess this is (A) more of Jobs consistency bug, don't get people expecting different behavior from different objects in the store, and (B) Apple has begun to feel proprietary about this music and wants to sell more and maybe feels a wee bit fearful that an open tune will suffer sales decline. Who knows.
Geez, the iPhone must have scared the crap out of everyone in the industry, seems it's Anti-Apple FUD since the iPhone was announced.
c ost.txt
I own an iPod (3rd gen or something), works great with the hundreds of CDs I own and ripped. I bought 1 song on the iTunes store. The article lie in implying the iPod is limited to FairPlay music. This is not the Zune, iTunes doesn't add a DRM layer to your music. It plays non-DRMed songs just fine.
I own a Mac, plays all the fansubbed unlicensed anime series I get on bittorrent. Works even in FrontRow. And on the video iPod and Apple TV if I batch convert them to H264. Again, non-DRMed video plays fine.
So, allow me not to be scared.
If you want to worry, check the big brotherish content protection in Vista:
A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_
How is this fresh? That is... we knew it was an iPod, right? Did people think it would not have DRM just because it was a phone this time?
This is the same argument every time a new iPod comes out... "hey, it only works with songs from iTunes" and "iTunes only works with iPods." No shit. We know this by now. This article really has nothing to do with the iPhone specifically, it's just another DRM bashing article. Which is fine, I'd love to see it gone as much as the next guy... but as far as DRM goes, Apple's is pretty "fair" IMO and definitely simple.
I spend almost 2 hours yesterday trying to get my little sister's Sansa to work with some songs my mom bought for her from the Walmart music store. Now THAT is some crappy DRM. Crappy software. Crappy everything.
I hate DRM as much as the next /.er, but Aple seems to be the least of all evils currently out there. Unless the recording industry moves to unprotected MP3/AAC/WMV (and the last I heard, Hell was has not even had frost warnings over the past few years, much less a chance of freezing over), legal downloadable files will always have DRM.
/.ers, Apple, for the most part, gives the people what they want (or at least as much as the RIAA will allow).
/.ers fo, and and just rip all our music from CDs to mp3 or whatever unprotected format you want. No DRM.)
GIven that, Apple gives a very lax DRM (compared to other services) when it comes to their service. Easy to tracks/albums to mp3. Easy to use download software (iTunes). Easy to pay for music (not that stupid MS bucks where you are forced to buy more than you need). Easy to use mp3 players that go along with their service.
When you consider the general public, and not typical
(Or you can do like the rest of us
This article isn't about the iPhone, it's about the iPod and it's DRM model for selling songs online. Whereas his claims towards the ipod may be justified, the title is just plain misleading.
This is just some guy trying to latch onto the current iPhone news by putting the word iPhone in the title, and then going on about the iPod, good catch by slashdot! What news value indeed!
As i sit here typing on my iKeyboard clicking my iMouse I'm reminded of the dot com phenomena of everything being eSomething - eMail, eTrade, eNough. Fortunately the letter i can't be trademarked. Before anyone else trademarks it I'm now selling uPhones, uMail servers, uTrees and so on, hey I'll make uBillions.
People who don't like Apple will argue with people who don't like people who don't like Apple, and the end result will be every bit as confusing as it sounds.
That, and I don't like people who don't like people who don't like Apple.
When the music industry finally realizes that they can sell you a digital DRM'd to hell download and mail you a pretty poster album cover the howling will make more sense.
I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
"You are always going to have to buy Apple stuff."
It's tragic and depressing, it is. If only there were a way for me to burn my FairPlay music to CDs! Then I could listen to it on any device, anywhere, anytime, or even re-rip it, thus ending up with unencumbered music.
C'mon. You're already buying compressed audio or video. If you were serious about quality - or "freedom!!1!!!1!" - you'd be purchasing the highest-quality source material possible, and using lossless compression to archive it. But you're not. Instead, you're complaining because your convenience is inconvenienced by FairPlay. Pfft.
For the same reasons as you gave, I'm not accepting Apple's stated reasons for not allowing arbitrary third party apps. Right now, the most I see that is reasonable is that the software would have to pass a standardized security validator, that's about it. I don't want to see that iPhone developers have to become part of a secret society in order to get any permission to install software.
That would be the killer app for the iPhone.
This tagline is copyrighted material. Please send $10 for an affordable replacement.
Microsoft used to promote its PlaysForSure copy-protection standard, but there must have been some difficulty with the "for sure" because the company has dropped it in favor of an entirely new copy-protection standard for its new Zune player, which, incidentally, is incompatible with the old one.
They got it part right in the article. The whole lawsuit is that one flavor of DRM is incompatible with another variety of player. While they were at it, why pick on just Apple and Microsoft. Toss in the Sony Minidisk and the Sony DRM format too.
They poked the lawsuit at the wrong end of the market. They complained that the players would not play each others incompatible formats. They should have gone the other way and insisted the Zune store, the Plays for Sure stores, and iTunes store all sold compatible MP3's instead of incompatible DRM files.
The truth shall set you free!
Wait till December and you will have a bunch of iphone alternatives, copies and wannabies at lower prices and lesser restrictions.
Sundays on /. always reminds of Ed Norton's monologue in Fight Club, when his boss discovers the rules for Fight Club.
/., seem to be the same piece of trash.
It ends with him saying maybe his boss shouldn't bring him every piece of trash he happens to find.
This, and most 'Sunday' driver stories on
Really the issues is that PlaysForSure DRM doesn't work on the iPod. That's almost always what the bitchin' is about. Well, it doesn't work on the Zune either. And on the flip side, FairPlay doesn't work on their media players. It's not the Mp3 (or in this case iPhone) player's issue. In this case, Apple doesn't support PFS because 1.) MS has never been very forthcoming in sharing and 2.) When Apple is totally and completely dominating a single market they just don't need second rate technology.
The good news is that the iPod plays Mp3s. First and foremost. Playing a DRM-ed song is just an annoyance that people have to put up with if they want easily acquired legal digital music. I told people for years that the reason I used Napster was because there was no effective alternative. When Jobs opened the iTunes store (before anyone else mind you), I had to pay the piper. If I continued to steal my music at that point, I could claim no moral high ground, and I would have been robbing the artists just as much if not more than the RIAA. So, I started buying music from the iTunes store. Yeah, it's DRM-ed, yeah I'll probably be stuck buying iPods for a long time. What a shame. Fortunately for me, and everyone else, iPods have really been popular and easy to come by.
Stories like this just make me wonder WTF we even show up here for on Sundays. Go back to bed. Wake up later. Watch the playoffs.
You might be right, but I'll venture to guess that Apple knows what it's doing. We'll see how sales actually go when the phone hits the market. It's an empirical question, after all.
Besides, at this point, we really don't know about just how many third-party apps will get through Apple's vetting process. There just isn't very much information yet, but my bet is that there will be a lot more third-party developer activity for the iPhone than people seem to think. I saw one post from a developer who attended a development forum on the iPhone at MacWorld who wrote that he/she was dropping all other projects to work on iPhone-related projects. He/she could not provide details due to a non-disclosure agreement. Apple is secretive, but it is not stupid.
In the abstract, I see nothing wrong with Apple making an effort to ensure compatibility and proper installation of non-Apple apps. Apple's tendency is to favor application quality over quantity. There is a trade-off at some level between wide-open access for third-party development and platform stability. In the end, there may not be quite as many little apps for the iPhone to do every last little function that some tiny part of the marketplace may want, but there will be robust, well-designed apps to handle all key functions. And, frankly, that's all Apple needs to secure a chunk of what is a huge market. Apple does not have to target the entire market in order to have a winning product. Trying to target the entire market, moreover, would probably be counterproductive.
Fairplay doesn't lock you into audio. Just burn your tracks to CD, then re-rip them. No big deal. Oh wait, the iPod plays mp3, .wav, .aiff, and generic mpeg4 and h.264 videos. And you don't have to buy iTunes, it's free.
So do I have to buy Apple stuff "Forever and Ever?" As long as they keep doing what they are doing, they're my first preference.
I buy Apple stuff because it really does just work. That's not vendor lock-in, that's superior design. When that changes, well, I'll change vendors. That's called the free market.
Second, fairplay is not the primary format of the iPod, or even iTunes, and presumable not the primary format of the iPhone. The songs are not translated to a Fairplay format, or any other format, when copied to the iPod. Songs are not by default imported into iTunes as Fairplay files, and there is not even an option to so do. I do not think Apple marks files that are imported in iTunes at all. And while the default import format is the is ACC, is it easy to change it to MP3 which is compatible with most players, except maybe Sony.
So fairplay will only effect users that buy songs from iTunes, and only those songs that are bought from iTunes and not burned to CDs. This is all covered in the article, but not the summary
The article is really about the fact that Apple will not license fairplay. This is really indicates a sad state of writing. First the author decries Fairplay as crippleware, and then complains that it cannot be acquired universally. This is like complaining that polio is a horrible disease, but innoculations means most of us won't get it. The article is correct that if you use the iTMS, you must buy apple stuff. The logical response to this is not to use the iTMS, and fight for non DRM online formats.
Then the article goes onto say that MS is better because it does license formats, but then has to admit that the Zune does not use the format. What the article does not admit is that this situation indicates that there is no money to be made in licenses DRM formats and thus compete with walmart on price instead of locking consumers in to an optional online format.
The point that the article does get to, after losing all credibility, is that consumers may end up with songs a product they cannot use. They may buy Play for sure, and then buy a zune or an iPod. They may have a collection of iTMS tracks, and then buy a Sandisk, in which case they will have to butn all the tracks to CD and reimport then. What the article does not mention is that we did this all before when we copied all our vinyl to tape, and even worse when we replaced all our vinyl with CDs.
I really believe that this article is the case of an uninspired writer cribbing from old articles. The lesson learned, and probably needs to be taught to the masses, is if possible buy a used CD and rip it to your computer.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
This is just part of a greater buildup that has been going on for quite some time. DRM is coming, it will continue to come stronger and stronger. Apple is a major player. In the music market, it is the major player. Microsoft, Sony, and a few other along with Apple are trying get themselves in the top. FairPlay is close right now, but I expect at some point that it will be opened up. That will happen after Apple has won out the DRM battle.
Go and criticize Apple where it fits, there's enough to be pissed off about for me as a Mac user. But this and the last article are just cheap flamebaits.
I wonder if FIFA has anything to say about Apple trampling on their trademark... oops, again? Or has this one expired too?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Or take your itunes track and burn it CD and it plays anywhere. Is it the same quality, no. Is it what you bought, yes. If you don't want to buy it, then don't. A great histrionic article is not needed or helpful.
yeah but you won't get that smug, self congratulationary feeling with somebody elses product :D
Maybe this is the real "format war" and HD-DVD and Blu-Ray are playing second fiddle? I say the solution is caveat emptor. Inform yourself before you buy something. I can't blame any of the companies for creating their own standards, even though I think it is funny that Microsoft can't even make a DRM that is compatible with their previous ones.
The author of this article equates "fair use" with "no protection and ignores the successful integration of easy access, CD burnability for fair use, and copy protection TO PROTECT THE AUTHORS of the music that has made Apple's model successful with both consumers and musicians. Apple has been on the forefront of protecting consumers from the subscription model (I don't want to pay continuously for access to music I already own) and music studios that want to raise the cost of songs. This iNYT piece s a stupid article that should be removed from Slashdot.
Sure, everyone who reads /. is up to date on the DRM wars, but I guarantee you the majority of NYT readers aren't. Anti-DRM publicity in the pages of the national "paper of record" is an excellent step forward for the good guys!
Why is all the good stuff already modded 5, when I have mod points?
My point is that a lot of little niche markets make up one honkin' big one, and whether or not Apple is encouraging 3rd party development, if every app has to pass through Apple's screening process and be distributed (read: priced and sold) through Apple's own structure, it will significantly discourage niche products.
As a long-time PalmOS user, I look to Palm for both negative and positive examples. Palm's success was built not on the PIM applications, but on 3rd party tools, and while Palm offered certification for software programs, it didn't require certification in order for programs to run. Not only did that drive innovation by 3rd parties, but many of those 3rd party developments put pressure on Palm to extend the basic OS accordingly. Tapped drop-down menus, fullscreen Graffiti entry, running apps off SD cards, full backup (not just PIM apps) and hard button reassignment all began as 3rd party innovations, and were later adopted by the PalmOS. At the same time, though, Palm's uncertainty about whether it was a hardware, software, or OS company has led to stultification of the underlying PalmOS, to the point where the iPhone has a real opportunity not only to get Treo users but non-smartphone users like me (I use a T|X) to cross over, if it's done properly by Apple.
I'm not counting Apple out by any means, nor am I assuming that 3rd party developers won't be able to create homebrew apps that will load and run on the iPhone, Apple-certified or not. That said, I hope that Apple is looking at the PDA rather than cellphone market for inspiration. Otherwise, this Newton 2007 may rot unpicked. {Prof. Jonathan}
If the NYT article is correct then I also want Microsoft to make sure that any software I purchase for Windows also runs on the Mac. Oh, nevermind. The word "crippleware" really means that your Windows machine will be crippled with spyware and viruses. So lets keep the Mac software separate.
Apple's DRM sucks _the_least_. IS it there? yeah. Does it impact 99% of the people that use the iTunes store? Not really.
Okay, you're stuck with Apple's iPodlike devices. So what? They're really good. I realize the people I'm talking to in this form: The Apple Haters and the DRM freedom fighters, but as a well educated IT person, my impression is:
Apple has managed to negotiate with folks that can't be negotiated with. Further, they were able to do so in a way that greatly benifits the customer. In doing so, they managed to jumpstart the current, DEVELOPING, download industry.
Do the permit renting the music? No. and I can see why: Rentals rely on the end user getting complacent and 'forgetting' that $15 a month fee. Once it gets past their notice, and they fall into complacency, the bult of that $15 is free money to the vendor. (Assuming they don't get bought or go out of business, or whatever)
DRM may be an unnecessary evil, but Apples done a lot to make it hurt as little as possible. I can't say that alternative has _ever_ acted with the consumer's interests in mind.
I've got absolutely NO qualms with sticking with Apple. Their products mesh extremely well with my needs.
"Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
Alternatively, consider that Apple would still be selling the music in AAC format, which it claims gives better quality in smaller file sizes than MP3.
Just to clarify a bit, AAC is as open a format as MP3. It's the MPEG group's successor to MP3. Apple adds their DRM to AAC, creating protected AAC. There's no reason for modern players to not support AAC. Apple's FairPlay is a separate issue.
Why not just follow the U.S. government's lead and Don't Ask where your downloaded music comes from, and Don't Tell anyone how you got it? If the concept works for the U.S. Armed Forces, it should work for you. If the government can assume that everyone who enlists is straight, why shouldn't you assume that all music you find on the Internet is free?
"You're young, you're drunk, you're in bed, you have knives; shit happens." -- Angelina Jolie
Microsoft has now proved the most popular reason to dump DRM: the Zune player forces users to rebuy their legit content, because its DRM conflicts with the old DRM.
I bought Pink Floyd's _Dark Side of the Moon_ on vinyl, on "audiophile" vinyl, on cassette, on CD, on "remastered" CD, and again a few times to replace worn-out copies of those (but never on 8-track, smartass - that was my copy of _The Wall_). But then I scanned my audiophile CD to HD/WAV, and have transferred it a dozen times: to backup CD in a closet, to mobile devices, to new HDs that aren't worn out, to SHN, then FLAC compression, to MP3 for streaming to my remote locations. I own that content, and I'll do whatever I want with it that's fair. If I want to prop up a wobbly table leg with the audiophile CD, I'll do it if I damn well please, even if the "license" I bought doesn't specify that use.
These record companies make most of their money from "catalog reissues". Records they made (usually cruelly unfair to artists) deals to sell decades ago, when they profited on their balance sheet. The biggest hits, that already paid for themselves many times over, are naturally the ones most desired to be played today. Because last generation's pop culture is this generations' folk culture - that's why we call our parents our "folks". The corrupt "copyright extension" monopoly laws are bad enough. "Enforcing" them beyond the publisher's rights, destroying rights and purchased privileges of the owner, and the public, is a culture-destroying crime.
And now, Microsoft has painted the picture for everyone to see. Make your player equal "Microsoft", and you'll pay for the privilege of using your own property as often as they "upgrade" their predictably buggy and inconvenient equipment.
Now is the time to make "DRM" as dirty a word as is "censorship". Kill it now, before it's permanently rooted, while people are still surprised to hear we have to dump our "old" content just to play it in some incrementally newer way.
--
make install -not war
You mean these guys?
....Sensationalistic and (largely) inaccurate (and misleading) titles for suckers.
Nothing to see here folks. You're not forced into Fairplay. Rip your CDs, buy your AllofMP3s, whatever. I experience total freedom with my ipod. The only thing I can't play on it are DRM'ed songs from other companies (sounds like they are the ones handcuffing me). I expect the iphone to be the same.
Mod -1 to slashdot for even posting this crap. Let's get some real news back on slash.
but what if iLikeThatSortofThing?
3rd party can't create apps for the iPhone, but they can create widgets, right?
Perhaps Apple just doesn't want to provide/support a "soft phone" and everything else that goes along with making full-blown apps on the phone.
With this approach it is indeed difficult to critisize any business practice, because almost all the time nobody ever forces you to do anything.
Maybe there is a difference in what people expect to get when they buy something and what they get in fact.
Also, business practices shape culture and law. If something is considered normal (although nobody is forced to do whatever), it will be an accepted way of doing things.
Many "digital products" transport politics by the way they work. So it is important to discuss the "defaults" these products are setting.
If you think that DRM suX0rz, then you have every right to say that the iPod is crap. Because it is an integral part of the product.
You do it because all your friends are doing it. So you go out, get drunk, and find the cheapest, skankiest thing you can get home to plug. And now you're actually touching it! And boy you're on it ALL NIGHT (in five minute incremements between reboots). When you wake up in the morning and take your first sober look at the 'face, knowing you could have done much better, you barely succeed in convincing yourself that it wasn't necessarily the wrong thing to do.
Then you realize you have 17 viruses.
"I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
As long as Apple will continue making products that "Just Work" (iPod, iBook, PowerBook, ...) and nice objects to look at, i don't mind having to buy their products. And ripping my cds / LPs to put them on the iPod. When DRM will come closer from my devices, then i'll fall into piracy. YAAARRRR !
I love the number of articles springing up, claiming that 2007 will be the year that DRM dies. None of these articles mention alternatives, either, it's beautiful.
:)
Without DRM in the age of digital music purchases, it's even easier to share music illegally... you don't need to rip music anymore, it's ripped for you. You could even have straight-to-torrent scripts.
Without restrictions on music, we will resort right back to the pre-DRM days. Nothing has changed. People still don't want to have to pay for music, and there are still file sharing services available to do it. Eventually, as people resume illegally distributing music, their friends will start doing it. The labels haven't done a thing to improve the quality of music, people are still unwilling to buy 2-4 good songs amongst 12 total on an album, and this will only lead to illegal downloading.
So the question is - do the people spreading anti-DRM FUD actually expect DRM to disappear? If so, they are guilty of believing their own hype, and in doing so have fooled themselves.
I'll be there to refer back to these articles and laugh.
You can easily fill up an iPod or iPhone with non-DRM music. Just rip it yourself.
Are you sure about that? I have a brand new RAZR from Sprint and while it has the capabilities to play mp3s you download from their store, it has no ability to copy your own to the phone (unless you want to save them as ring tones). What makes you think the iPhone would be different? While it is true that you can rip your CDs to an iPod, nowhere was it mentioned that that capability will be included with an iPhone. Downloading music for a fee is one of the revenue streams the cell phone companies are depending on. Why would they want to give that up?
Given that:
- the iPhone is likely to use iTunes for the synching
- this limitation of only supporting Fairplay DRM and Audible DRM, has been around since the iTunes store came out
- iTunes allows you to use your own none-DRMed music
I don't know why the fuss is being made over the DRM on the iPhone, since this argument applies to any iPod out there, and therefore is neither new, nor iPhone specific.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
even though I think it is funny that Microsoft can't even make a DRM that is compatible with their previous ones.
I think it's even funnier that emusic is the only online store selling legal MP3's that play on every MP3 player out there including my car stereo and living room DVD player.
As artists drop the RIAA and their lables and move to emusic, I expect things to get uncomfortable for the 4 labels in the cartel. They won't be able to sue and shut this down like they did Napster. They will have to adopt or die.
The truth shall set you free!
There must be a spelling error here. The Apple policy must be called "FairPay"! Or...?
The only thing I've heard the word "fresh" used is in conjunction with fruit and douches.
Which are you?
The sounds and pictures for your existing phone are DRM'd.
Where's the hue and cry there?
This and the "iPhone not running OSX" are just so much ign'ant piling on.
These stories make it and other less silly ones don't - of course you can't mod submissions - so it makes you wonder about the editots' motives.
The headline is right there on the front page / feed - the proof of the folly is buried in the comments, just like retractions are printed on page 7.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Check out FIC's Neo1973 as an open alternative to iShackles. Coming to the US in February 2007! It runs the 99.99% open source Linux OpenMoko platform based on OpenEmbedded. A good hardware comparison between the iPhone and Neo1973 is linked here.
Following the mailing lists on the OpenMoko site, it looks like the Neo1973 is highly competitive with the iPhone. The Neo has a much better screen and a better processor. Plus it's completely open sourced except for a couple of device drivers (cellular and bluetooth?). You can write your own programs in whatever language and load them on your own phone yourself. Python, Ruby, Perl, C/C++, and so on. There's even a current effort to get J2ME working. And there will be a community site sponsored by FIC where people can share or sell applications and others can download them.
Personally, with nearly the same hardware abilities and the ability to write your own software, I see no reason to get a locked down iPhone. Sure, the iPhone comes with 4-8gb of space, that's the big difference in hardware, but it also costs $150-$250 more on top of a 2-year contract. So it seems that difference is a wash. (A 2gb microSD costs ~$60 USD from NewEgg.)
Say all you want about the software, if I'm going to carry around a something bigger than a Razr it better be a full blown computer. Not a crippleware 'phone.'
What is up with all the anti-iphone stories.. they seem a bit overblown. If this was digg, I would have to label it flamebait.. the previous story about the iphone as "wildly inaccurate"
I don't want this to sound like flamebait, because it represents my actual feelings.
The story this links to is just a typical anit-drm rant. Why is this tied to the iphone? because apple makes it? yeah, give me a real story.
I would like that Daemon tools would emulate a CD/DVD burner too. Then no CDs would be wasted in the process.
We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
Oh, someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed?
I'm still an emusic subscriber, but wow ... prolly not for long
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
Blame the content owners, not Apple!
Apple would love to sell unencumbered files, but the RIAA/MPAA ain't having it. If Apple hadn't agreed to employ DRM, there would be no iTunes Store.
Everyone loves to whine about being tied to Apple forever, but it's not true. Yes, it sucks to have to burn and rerip all your iTunes Store music, but the point is, it's POSSIBLE, and you're just lazy. Same reason people piss and moan about Windows but keep on using it-- switching to an alternative would require extra work, and they're lazy.
As for Apple limiting FairPlay to Apple-made devices and software, again, blame the content owners. Apple makes a pittance on each sale from the iTunes Store-- the content owners get most of the money. So the incentive for Apple to even have the online store is to induce you to buy hardware from them, the profit from which makes having the online store worth it.
I think the iPhone is a work of art. Beautiful, functional, and a perfect embodiment of what Steve Jobs must want. Unfortunately, he doesn't want the same things as me, which just might kill it for me.
Lack of 3rd party apps will kill the iPhone, at least as a smartphone. While the Blackberry is pretty cool out of the box, it takes a couple extra 3rd party applications to really make it shine.
Hopefully, Jobs statement is more in line with what is required for the blackberry - applications must be signed, and you pay ~$100 for a developer license which lets you sign anything you want. Time will tell.
Look, I'm as excited about the iPhone as the next guy, but can Taco et al PLEASE stop posting every damn article in the bin that has "iPhone" in the headline? This is getting seriously ridiculous.
3rd party involvement ... right. Having started with the Pilot and then moved to Treo 650, through V, Treo 270, Tungsten T and I can honestly tell that I have seen every fruit of 3rd party tools for your phone. Pro: a lot of software. Con: a lot of buggy software.
Face it, a reboot once a day because of a not-so-stable mindmap application is annoying, but rebooting the phone is horrible. Especially if it happens in your bag and you have to enter a PINcode to get your SIM activated, meaning voicemailservices all the time. I love the zillion applications that are available but hate the lack of quality. And be honest: the portfolio is aging, except for the casual jewel in the collection.
I tried the 750v for 3 monthes and I completely lost it and took my 650 back. The 750v was the first Palm device I actually wanted to toss against the wall. Even more instabile then 5.4Garnett and completely not user friendly to my standards. But again: 10 years of Palm OS and a daily Mac user, so completely not 'into' the Windows way of doing things. Maybe a Windows user loves Windows Mobile. But again: third party involvement makes the phone even more unstable then it is.
Don't get me wrong: I see the advantages of third party apps, but where are the results? Palm and Windows are buggy. Symbian series 60 not popular for developers. Then what?
If the iPhone suits my needs businesswise and is stable, then it's an option once it comes to Europe. But yes: I need 3G+ on it, since we even have that here in basements.
To me this is more like:
Microsoft has now proved the most popular reason to dump Microsoft DRM: the Zune player forces users to rebuy their legit content, because its MS DRM conflicts with the old MS DRM.
Let MS enjoy their Desktop OS monopoly, but never, ever, give them any other monopoly to control us.
Apple does DRM right. At least to me.
We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
this isnt about technical stuff anymore- jobs has gone beyond that to the mass market of the mythical grandma, although in this case the archetype is the 8th grader.
these people don't care about ANY of this - it is like buying blue jeans for your 8th grader; what matters is whats cool, which is TOTALLY unrelated to any technical aspect.
so you can huff and puff all you want, but the kids are not listening.
I have a friend who runs an orphanage in Africa. The price of one of these phones would feed her kids for 6 months.
Our priorities are completely fucked.
There are plenty of us who object to any DRM, especially on music. Canadians have a right to private copying, so we quite legitimately object to US laws being forced on us.
Not only is the iPhone's FairPlay DRM the same story as the iPods, but its software model should also follow the model of 5G iPod games: cheap, high volume, decent quality ... vs. the overpriced or hit and miss shareware stuff that offers developers little reason to do anything really interesting for the Palm Treo.
I have a Treo, and am aware of the various things that are around for it, but iv'e also discovered what a crappy sync/update/install system it offers, and how it's unlikely that apps, once installed, will continue to work past two sync cycles. Vindigo refuses to sync all the time. Palm's own HotSync for photos is simply brain dead. A hack to support Google Maps required tracking down and installing a problematic Java VM, another library, and a flakey shareware app that never worked quite right. Most users don't want a toy box to hack on, they want a friggen phone that just works.
Part of the Treo's problem is shoddy 3rd party programming, part is the minimal memory available on the Treo, and part is simply the difficulty of managing a random assortment of apps installed on a platform with minimal regard for security (the Palm OS running a phone is like the classic Mac OS running a webserver - yes it can happen, but it's far beyond anything it was ever inteded to do).
RoughlyDrafted has a series of articles looking "Inside the iPhone," exploring why Apple didn't target faster 3G networks in EDGE, EVDO, HSUPA, 3G, and WiFi, a substantiated look at how the iPhone is indeed running OS X (contrary to yesterday's uninformed reports that it isn't), what it means to users and developers, and how ARM is involved, in Mac OS X, ARM, and iPod OS X, and why the supposedly "closed system" Apple describes for the iPhone won't preclude third party development in Third Party Software.
because customers in every market are shying away from trusted distribution channels like iTunes?
they don't know you, the anonymous third party developer, but they sure as hell know Apple, and Apple's endorsement of your product is what they need to see.
Plug your iPod into a friends computer, and swap music files without installing any additional software (like iTunes)?
1. Purchase song on iTunes with DRM 2. Rip to CD 3. Delete purchased music 4. Copy music back to iTunes from ripped CD 5. DRMless music How are you stuck with Apple again???
"It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing". (Macbeth, Wm. Shakespeare)
Sounds better in the proper English.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
I hear this argument a lot and I don't understand it. I can play iTunes purchased songs on my car stereo and home dvd player too. iTunes has 3x as many songs as emusic too. I haven't tried emusic (but I am going to in 5 minutes) but I can attest that iTunes is well worth the experience as well. It is a sharply designed store with nice browsing features and the largest library available. That has to be worth something to some people, in spite of the DRM.
It is however very easy to critisize a company for DRM that can be easily avoided by ripping your own CDs if you simply want to be a drama queen.
Professing the end of the world as we know it is an honored pastime on Slashdot afterall....
"Oh noes! Apple sells DRM'd music! Nevermind that most iPod owners don't buy iTMS tracks and instead rip their own CDs, lets continue to make a big deal out of it anyway, oh noes!"
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
Step carefully, /. seems to be mined with those lately.
Interestingly, a lot come from silly blogs making up their own facts.
Sure, if you don't mind that this puts your music through a lossy compress+decompress step.
But that's not what annoys me. Nor the fact that iTunes' decompress-to-CD feature might go away at any time -- when you use proprietary software and become dependent on an upgrade path, you're making yourself someone else's bitch. But that's just the nature of the game and I'm sure most users have (at least unconsciously) come to terms with that by now.
No, the real slimey thing about decompressing to CD, is that nobody knows whether or not it's legal.
DMCA defines circumvention as bypassing DRM without authorization from the copyright holder. Did you get authorization to remove the DRM from a iTMS-purchased song, from the copyright holder? Do you even know what the copyright holder has authorized you to do, and not do?
DVDs don't contain any statement that says you're allowed to watch them. We assume that it's implied, because if MPAA starts suing people for merely watching DVDs, they might get a little money from one settlement, but then that'll be the end of the DVD market. One thing we do know, thanks to the 2600 case, is that running DeCSS isn't on the secret list of authorized uses.
What is on the secret list of authorized uses for iTMS-bought songs? We all assume it's ok to bypass the DRM as a necessary step of listening to the songs. Are we also assuming that these RIAA-member companies have granted authorization to remove the DRM for purposes of burning to an audio CD? That's a pretty amazing assumption. These companies are part of the lobby to remove or reduce Fair Use; they don't want you to burn music to a CD even when the original music is not DRMed. That's a situation where Fair Use law, not the copyright holder, has the final say as to what is legal and what is not. But when music has "technological measures to limit access," then DMCA says that the copyright holder, rather than any coded law, is who has the final say about the details of what is permitted and what isn't. And you just blissfully assume they're ok with it? Wow.
The beauty of never publicly stating what is authorized is that you can always change your mind, and revise your secret list of authorized uses. Somebody pisses you off? Just retroactively make them become a criminal, and now the government will be on your side when you attack them.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
The lesson learned is that all Microsoft trouble with DRM and Trusted Computing is more or less an image problem.
Fairplay is a DRM, but gives a little sugar and put Jobs in a conference room and even the most anti-DRM crowd you can find on the net falls in love with it.
Same thing for the application. This is slashdot, the battle front of OSS and it only takes Jobs smile to give away happily every kind of freedom on your own 600$ PDA.
The reason I see value in the iPhone is unlimited communication, NOT FOR MUSIC! Music is an afterthought & even a distraction for me.
The wide capabilities (& wider in next gen releases) of the iPhone are such that any respecting user of technology can see the device as a VCD, Virtual Connection Device.
Whether you are doing a local simple bit of a document or image collection, it is the bi-directional communication with what is arguably an unlimited number of devices through multiple RF & potentially IR methods that means it is a programmable blank slate computing communicator.
Whether you merely do simple things sending and receiving messages, or you actually use a VCD to do complex interactive and controlling functions is entirely up to the software you will eventually load into the VCD.
I don't understand your use of curly brackets at the end of your posts. Are you signing the comment? If so, why not use a standard designation, such as a dash, a double dash, or a tilde before your name? If this seems too informal, your usage of brackets, whatever it means, is not normal or readily understood.
it is very much early to be criticizing the software running on Mac OS X on Apple's iPhone. The final shipping version has not been finalized. Info at this point is speculative and rumors.
You misunderstood his complaint. If you've only bought one song from the iTunes Music Store, then you're not really the audience for this piece. The problem isn't that the iPod locks you into something, it's that the iTunes Music Store locks you into the iPod. They've supposedly sold 2 billion songs; that's 2 billion non-interoperable files that someone's been stuck with.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
I am against DRM now that I have seen it implemented. The author is correct in his assertion in calling it crippleware but he should lambast Microsoft equally. Apple FairPlay works for now at least but Microsoft is a complete mess. On the Microsoft side, the openness of the system is the very problem with it. I find that either Microsoft or the developers don't implement it correctly and the content won't even play. Who do call to fix it? Apple sqeezes by this because it controls everything but that doesn't make me comfortable about the future. Particularly, that it will be used to lock me in. DRM should go! It was a really bad idea to tackle the problem of piracy.
You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
subject says it all, but really..they HAVE licensed it to some people.
ok one.
lame device.
but NEVER is already untrue.
What you have to realize is, the NYT matters. /. doesn't matter. Whatever you think about Apple, however much you want to make all kinds of excuses for it, when the NYT starts calling the Apple lockins 'crippleware', the world has changed. Apple is no longer cool. The iPhone isn't cool. Its just dysfunctional.
Its right there on the technology page. Apple just made an enormous howler. Time to stop making those excuses, because no-one is listening. Its like the invasion of Hungary. Sorry, the fraternal intervention in support of our comrades. No-one was listening after that either. This was the point where the rest of us could no longer avoid confronting what exactly Apple is, because its so in your face. And this is when they lost us.
Are you retarded or what. You can put any music into iTunes and iPOd except DRM'd files from some other DRM scheme. If you already have Apple files, no problem. /.
And in any case: JUST BURN THE SONGS TO AN AUDIO CD and it will remove the DRM. If you can't figure that out, you shouldnt be writing summaries for
The music and movie industries are the ones requiring DRM protections. Sheesh.
I agree completely. I was flabbergasted at the whole article. It sets up Apple to rail against, but does actually take Microsoft to task for changing its DRM and screwing customers, but then goes on to include a quote about how "everyone should move to subscriptions". WTF?!!! every subscription service out there uses DRM to make sure that when you stop paying you lose _all_ of your music. Wait, wasn't that the articles big bitch about Apple, how you were locked it to iTunes?? If iTunes is bad, then subscriptions are pure evil. I want to own my music, which to me also means being able to free it form DRM, but I'll be damned if I'm going to RENT $#%#$% music!
This problem was true for the iPod too, and the iPhone launch changed nothing. The argument would be (I think) that Apple has a monopoly on MP3 players, and is abusing that position to do better in the music sales business. This would be valid if Apple was a monopoly.
The new thing about the iPhone is that it supports bluetooth and 802.11g WLAN. This leaves a potential for transferring music directly between phones, og between a PC (e.g. iTunes) and an iPhone. There is no indication that Apple will officially support it, and they do have 100% control over the platform.
One could say that the iPhone is even more resticted than the Zune because it does not allow music sharing AT ALL, even though it would be relatively easy to implement given the power of the platform.
There are a lot of protability that one could want from wireless, some would require 3G to be REALLY cool:
Apple may chose ignore these options, and it may work out fine. In the future, though, people will want these products, because wireless is more convenient, and other companies will make them.
So there is no rush, but Apple will have to deal with the over-the-air DRM issue. And it's gonna be ugly. Like the Zune;)
And God Help Me if I should ever even think about buying a Zune and burning the few songs I bought through iTunes onto a CD then re-ripping them for the Zune. Hell, even typing in the four letters 'z', 'u', 'n' and 'e' in that order is causing me incredible amounts of pain and suffering from the FairPlay mental virus that Apple planted in my brain. And besides, if any of my FairPlay ripped CDs ever get into the Zune, it will cripple the Zune forever with a horrible user interface and turn the Zune a crappy shade of brown.
Please. Do you think Steve Jobs gives a flying flip about DRM--outside the fact that it was the only way he could get the music industry to allow him to sell music via the iTunes store? Hell, the DRM lock-in isn't even applied on the iTunes servers--it's applied after the song is downloaded, which means the microsecond the music industry allows Apple to sell DRM-free music, it would take a simple upgrade to iTunes to remove DRM.
Besides, FairPlay is an odd duck--has anyone with an iPod noticed that DRM locked FairPlay music just plays on any iPod without having to register the device first? I mean talk about a weak form of DRM--I suspect it's a slightly more sophisticated version of the bozo bit used in MacOS System 5 or earlier, which was a file attribute bit which told the finder not to copy the specified file. This is unlike every other DRM-enabled device which requires that the device be registered with whatever ID you're using so it can read those files.
"You are always going to have to buy Apple stuff. Forever and ever."
If our experience with iPods and with cellphones is any indication, these puppies won't last quite as long as the 24 month phone contract they will come with. Buy the insurance.
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
From the article:
This is not true. Only tracks bought from the iTunes store are DRM'd. You're perfectly free to rip your own music, or - legally or illegally - download it from sources without DRM. I encourage everyone not to buy from the iTunes store (although I have to admit to buying about 10 tracks and 2 albums for convenience's sake).
Actually, the iPhone that Jobs demo'ed at MacWorld is running MacOS X which has a huge 3rd party developer following. He also showed it running the widgets that currently run on Dashboard on OS X. (As I write this there are 2552 widgets available at Apple's Dashboard download page!) http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/
So, the iPhone has the following:
Quad-band cell phone
Cingular EDGE data
Web browser
Push E-mail
Camera
GPS
Text Messaging
WiFi and VOIP
and it runs Mac OS X (2500 widgets and counting)
It's the accessory that I've been waiting for.
Chris Nordby
Check this out. Its technical specs prevent vendors from installing any type of DRM.
I think we should just give up with MP3s and use this format instead.
The article seems a well orchestrated and well aimed bashing at iThings Apple. Just at the moment it really brings something new (iPhone).
For starters, you can load and play other media than protected AAC and video on your iPod / iPhone. The article falsely claims this is not the case.
You cannot post reactions to this article, so take a wild guess of what its purpose really is.
I prefer Apple fair play over Microsoft's Control Freakin' DRM.
New York Times? I did not expect it coming from that angle.
Guess we'll read more of this crap any time Zune.
--------
* Sigh *
So people want to force Apple to make Microsoft formats work on the iPod?
Apple has a monopoly on music players. They're using their monopoly to deliberately damage the competition. It sounds like it's time for the DOJ to step in and break up Apple (or at least fine them into submission).
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Uh. Since when did DRM constitute "crippleware"?
I don't know. I've been using computers for oh, 18 of the 23 years I have been alive and have used shareware for a great portion of that time. Generally, "crippleware" has referred to shareware or trial software that is intentionally crippled in some way so as to remove functionality present in the fully paid for version of the software. Just because some luddite idiot uses a word incorrectly doesn't mean that the NYT should have to as well.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 is the magic number.
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
I want a telephone that can hold some serious music. A couple gigs just isn't going to do it for me!
Why can't they make a telephone, with some real music and photo storage capability?
I don't know anyone who bought an iTunes song and then figured out they needed an iPod to play it so the went out and bought an iPod. Nor do I know anyone that bought an iPod and thought their only source of music was iTunes. If either of these scenarios were true, then I'd say Apple is vendor-locking their music.
Apple tells you how to get rid of their DRM. They even ran an ad campaign about it.
Yes, if you turn it around and Mix, Burn, Rip, you can lose some quality in the Rip step if you use a lossy format, but that's true whether you're ripping stuff you burned from iTMS or you're importing a CD you bought at Borders.
If Apple's DRM wasn't simply an "honor system" approach to DRM, I'd be worried. But I'm moderately hopeful Apple isn't that stupid.
But, after all, Steve Jobs himself said it's impossible to protect music.
I use eMusic, all the time. I tell people to use eMusic when they start griping about the iTunes "monopoly". You can use eMusic too. The iTunes Music Store, however can not ignore the major labels the way you, and I, and eMusic can. So talking about indie labels on eMusic or experimental distribution is a fish encarnadine.
Oh christ, don't buy it.
Whine whine, bitch bitch, moan moan.
I probably won't buy one because I rarely use my phone. I keep it as a convenience. I would, however, love to have a real convergence device like this. I just got back from MWSF for some IT training and I have to say, the iPhone really is years ahead of any other vendor's phones.
So.. if you want to be on your high horses, don't buy the damn thing. If I get one, I'm sure I'll put an occasional Apple Store tv show on it and I'll put some of the music on that I've ripped myself.
Just don't bitch that you CAN'T get one when you simply feel too moral to buy one.
I'm not feeling witty so bite me
i think randall stross is making a very important argument from two and a half years ago. honestly, where was he when everyone was hashing out the same arguments when the iTunes music store first opened?
when religion is no longer the opiate of the masses, governments will resort to real opiates.
Not to sound sexist, but are you a woman? Few men would assume that all people have wanted a pony at some point in their lifes. ;)
"That's so plausible, I can't believe it!" - Leela
Nothing about the iPod stops you from loading MP3s onto it.
For that matter, nothing about the iPod stops you from loading non-DRMed AACs onto it.
So if you don't want limited AACs, go buy a physical CD and rip it yourself, or buy cheap unlimited downloads from other sources like EMusic or the artists themselves and throw them into iTunes, and from there onto your iPod/iPhone/iWhatnot. When Jobs dies and someone else fills the niche of 'computer company that gives a shit about the user experience and style', move your MP3s/AACs/etc onto there.
So much for "always buying Apple". Yeah, if you buy music from the iTunes Store it'll be DRMed. So don't do it.
egypt urnash minimal art.
It looks like the apps are closed, too, so you can't write or run your own, just buy them from Apple.
One one side we have Java-enabled phones, but their UIs generally suck.
On the other side, we have well-engineered devices with wonderful UI such as the Danger Hiptop and these new Apple iPhone. But they both have closed application worlds. At least the Danger one lets you develop if you say pretty please, but they don't let you distribute...so the carriers get total control of what apps you run, and get a cut of every one you install.
Hmmm...this is beginning to sound like a conspiracy.
So I certainly do have cause to complain.
I'll just buy a standard UMS or MTP device that won't try to tell me what to do.
All music players use DRM and all of them lock you into buying music from their service. The iPod & iPhone are no different than the zune & other players. HOWEVER, all of them including the iPod & iPhone are still able to play unprotected MP3s and there's nothing to stop you from ripping your own CDs and putting them on your iPhone. You can also buy unprotected music from eMusic and play them on your iPod. You can't play music from zune marketplace on your iPod or iPhone, of course, not that anyone would want to.
My eMusic purchases work just fine on my iPod as they are in MP3 format. I do not use eMusic anymore because it was a pain to use. I find iTMS to be much more convenient. I can burn as many CD's as I want but I have not used CD's for music since I bought an iPod back in 2002. I would buy the occasional CD but I would quickly rip them to MP3 format with iTunes.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
Neo1973 and OpenMoko. It may not have all the features of the iPhone, but it costs half as much, is (almost) totally open source, you'll be able to write, install any software you'd like, and you are not locked into a single service provider.
I can play iTunes purchased songs on my car stereo and home dvd player too.
You can play purchased songs if you burn them as an audio CD. I'm talking about MP3's. The stuff you download from iTunes won't play on any of my CD MP3 players as an MP3 CD. They are not MP3's. I don't want the expense of money, materials, quality, and time to download digital music, burn a CD, rip the CD and then burn another digital music CD. Let's skip the un-nessary middle step. Let's skip the double conversion steps of converting to and burning a redbook CD and then ripping to MP3. Just sell me the MP3's in the first place.
I don't like getting up every hour to change the CD. I like stuffing in a jukebox load of MP3's in the player and letting it run all day.
A typical MP3 CD will play for about 8-12 hours, good for a full days work. Do you want to trade your 2 Gig Nano for the 64 Meg model that will only play an hour of music? That's why I play MP3 CD's.
The truth shall set you free!
Apple supports Digital Rights Restrictions. For that alone, I refuse to buy or use Apple products. Call me stupid or what have you, but Technology cannot ever decide what I do is "Fair Use" or not. Fair Use is about intent, not actions. Until computers can read minds, intent is beyond their ken.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
but those iHandcuffs with the iPhone are the closest thing a geek gets to getting f*cked
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
There are other products with the same sort of interface.
I need the ability to just drop files onto my mp3 player, because I bring it with me to share music files with friends, and I don't want to have to deal with installing stuff on their machines. I want something that "just works".
The article is at the least misleading about the eMusic store, it is ok if your music interest falls within their very specific offerings, certainly not a very wide range of music genres, where is the classical on eMusic? It is easy to point at Apple when there has not been any contact with the music industry to get their input into this, rather one-sided. Only yesterday I tried to move a number of legally purchased albums in protected wma format (approx 3 years old) to a new version of Windows Media Player, version 9 did not recognise my licenses (backup made by Media Player itself), advised to convert to 10, no way. The albums I purchased are just plain LOST! Thanks Microsoft. I get the option to buy a new license!!! At least Apple does a decent job regarding the limitations it has been imposed by the music industry, far better than Microsoft. Ofcourse that does not mean it cannot be improved upon! But that still needs the acknowledgement and cooperation of the music industry and the are certainly not moving forward without being pushed by guess who? Indeed it was Jobs that has been able to keep the iTunes store prices down and fixed, to the benefit of all "locked in" users. Don't by it if you do not want the iPod, take another mp3 player and go ahead.
My point is still, if I just HAVE to have mp3s on cd, I can burn a PCM encoded cd, then rip them to the computer as MP3s then burn them back to a disk. People say that is a lot of work, but how do you do it now with songs from your CD collection? You have to rip the cd to mp3 then load them back up to a cd as mp3s, correct? I suppose if you can find songs online that are un-drmd, like eMusic, you can skip that step, but their content is very limited. Yahoo has better content, but doesn't work with Macs or iPods. That actually pisses me off more than iPod+iTunes DRM. And God forbid if the record industry manages to force rented music on us all that expires once we stop paying the man!
Maybe people are noticing and they just don't care. Maybe the people who care are decidedly in the minority. Ever consider that?
"Apple's tendency is to favor application quality over quantity."
"There is a trade-off at some level between wide-open access for third-party development and platform stability."
"...there will be robust, well-designed apps to handle all key functions."
"And, frankly, that's all Apple needs to secure a chunk of what is a huge market."
All these are unsubstantiated claims. The first is unproven, the second arguably wrong, and the last two are simply speculation. Finally:
"You might be right, but I'll venture to guess that Apple knows what it's doing. We'll see how sales actually go when the phone hits the market. It's an empirical question, after all."
We will see how the iPhone does but we won't know how it might have done had 3rd party support been managed differently.
Check the title of this thread. "Beware the Apple iPhone iHandcuffs". Read the message in context.
That doesnt work unless you sacrifice sound quality even further or battery time/storage space by reripping as lossless.
Um, I said that in the original post. You quoted it in your first reply:
That doesnt work unless you sacrifice
If you're concerned about battery time, you're talking about portable players, and you're listening to music through cheap earbuds in a noisy environment.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
We're are all talking about a device that is 6 months away from being available on the market. Very few details have been released. So, yeah, I am speculating. Isn't everyone? Only a few people at Apple really know how hard it will be for third-party developers to sell apps for the iPhone. Most people seem to assume Apple is closing everyone out entirely. I am betting not so closed, but who really knows? It's ALL speculation based on a few quotes from Jobs and others.
Your comments just cast judgment -- "unsubstantiated" . . . "unproven" . . . "arguably wrong" -- without any effort to defend or substantiate a position of your own. If you have a real argument to make, go for it.
"So, yeah, I am speculating. Isn't everyone?"
No. Apple has made some specific comments regarding the product. Not all comments on the iPhone are speculation.
"Only a few people at Apple really know how hard it will be for third-party developers to sell apps for the iPhone."
Unless Apple changes their stated position it will be impossible for 3rd parties to sell their own apps.
"Most people seem to assume Apple is closing everyone out entirely. I am betting not so closed, but who really knows?"
Apple controls access to any SDKs, controls the ability to develop apps, controls distribution and retains the right to approve any 3rd party apps. As such, any app that provides functions that Apple doesn't want on the phone (say...VoIP, MS-DRMed music, IM apps that compete with iChat, etc) will not get approved. The system is closed.
"If you have a real argument to make, go for it."
Sure I will. I will quote my own statement: "All these are unsubstantiated claims. The first is unproven, the second arguably wrong, and the last two are simply speculation."
"unsubstantiated" : You made all the comments I quoted without any facts or evidence to back them up. All your points were unsubstantiated.
"unproven" - this refers to your claim that "Apple's tendency is to favor application quality over quantity." Care to prove that? Just because Jobs says it doesn't mean it isn't so (and Jobs didn't even say it). Where has there been any evidence that this is the case and in what way have you attempted to prove the point?
"arguably wrong" - this refers to "There is a trade-off at some level between wide-open access for third-party development and platform stability.". Jobs claims that the iPhone runs "OS X", a platform that Apple would have us believe offers superior stability to any other. This stability exists in spite of wide-open 3rd party application support (i.e. no trade-off for platform stability). OS X, properly implemented, should provide system immunity from misbehaving applications. In practice, there is no platform stability issue on any existing smartphones or computer systems that can't be ultimately blamed on the OS itself. Your comment is "arguably wrong" because I can successfully argue that it is wrong.
Of course my comments cast judgement. They are also correct. I've now substantiated my positions; something that most would realize didn't need substantiation and something that you have twice failed to do yourself. Frankly, your comments are poorly thought out and reflect an unjustified confidence in the well-meaning of a company that is known for its hubris and deceit. Jobs is keeping the platform closed because he hopes to profit maximally from it, just as he kept the iPod closed to Windows because, and he publicly stated this, the iPod was part of the superior Mac user experience and was reserved only for mac users. He eventually changed course on that, and I feel it's likely that he will change course on the decision to close the iPhone platform as well. It has nothing to do with ensuring app quality or platform stability; it has everything to do with control over device functions and profit.
Yahoo has better content, but doesn't work with Macs or iPods. That actually pisses me off more than iPod+iTunes DRM.
You have embraced single vendor lock-in because it meets your needs of a PC (or MAC) and an Apple branded digital music player. I am locked out of most online markets because I have not picked a single vendor lock-in. My portable digital music player (Inexpensive Coby brand) is great but the DRM vendors including MS's Plays for Sure & Zune, and Apple's Fairplay are all incompatible with it. It plays MP3's and non-DRM WMA files. My CD MP3 players include the car deck, a portable CD player, and the living room DVD player. Like my portable digital music player, all these devices can not play the digital content from any DRM format. The DRM formats are all incompatible. Wouldn't it be nice if Digital Music was standardized and any content would play on any player? Remember how Telarc, Capitol, and Sony CD's would all play on a Panasonic CD player? CD's sold. In the DRM digital music market, the market is carved up into many small walled gardens where only MP3's play everywhere, but few sell them.
Apple would rather have king of the hill single vendor lock-in then me as a consumer. Same applies to all other DRM format vendors.
If everyone voted with their pocketbook against DRM, it would be stillborn just like the DAT recorder. Unfortunately I have been outvoted by those who love DRM. The consumer has taken the bait hook line and sinker.
Heavy marketing and promotion sometimes outweighs the consumer is always right.
Have fun, send a Creative Zen owner a gift card for iTunes and send an iPod owner a Yahoo Music subscription.
Can you say "Incompatible by design?"
The truth shall set you free!
You have to rip the cd to mp3 then load them back up to a cd as mp3s, correct?
Sorry for the second reply, but I didn't cover that point. I have a portable music player just like you do but another brand. I have already ripped by CD collection just like you have except I put them in MP3 format. From here, it's a simple task to stuff a few MP3's on a CD for the road trip or to enjoy in the living room on the main stereo.
If you used your Apple supplied defaults, you didn't rip to MP3. If you bought from the iTunes store, you don't have MP3s. It is much easier to create a MP3 player because everyting is already in the MP3 format. You get to deal with DRM if you want to play your music in anything without an iPod Dock such as DVD players and CD MP3 car stereos.
The truth shall set you free!
Not entirely true. I have embraced the Apple solution because they offer the best product from the player all the way down to the store.
Correction; entirely true. The single vendor solution meets you needs. It is the best offering of store, player, and software. That is the DRM bait and you have it hook line and sinker. Just for grins grab a few tunes off Yahoo Music and get them to play on your iPod. Better yet, when your iPod gets dropped too many times and you decide you like the Zen better, grab one and load your songs from the iTunes store.
Until a better solution comes along, you have taken the DRM bait. I haven't. iTunes is incompatible with my hardware and OS. MP3's play on all my hardware. Anything not in MP3 format is incompatible. I'm still waiting for a better vendor of MP3 music.
The truth shall set you free!
The "DRM bait" is a foolish assertation. I've owned iPods and iTunes since before the Apple FairPlay DRM was implemented, and was perfectly satisfied with the product. Therefore, the recent inclusion of DRM to iTunes stores played no role in my decision to use iPod + iTunes + Mac OS. I don't have to use iTunes, but I do, because there isn't a better marketplace for browsing, nor a better market with more selection. At least we agree that we are both still waiting for a better vendor of MP3 music. Unfortunately, it isn't going to happen, because the labels won't sign off on any music without some sort of DRM scheme.
Therefore, the recent inclusion of DRM to iTunes stores played no role in my decision to use iPod + iTunes + Mac OS.
While you are happy now, they have built the DRM fence closing you in. So far you haven't tried your freedom to find the walls to confining yet. The walls are there, and you are fine with it. You get everyting from your own CD's and i-Tunes. This may be OK for you for the rest of your life. When you decide on a subscription service to have access to a wide library, you will find a wall in the way. When you find the Beatles on the SONY site at a later date, you will find the wall.
I'm on the outside of these walls so I see them very clearly. The bait of music is there in both subscription models and per download model. All I have to do is choose a single vendor's DRM and take the bait.
I have decided to stay on the other side of the fence. I am a consumer. I embrace cross platform standards. When Vidoe players came out I bought a Laserdisk. One of the deciding factors was Broadcast quality standard NTSC, No DRM, no flashing colors, rolling pictures, etc. Compatible high quality video was a major selling point. This is when pre-recorded VHS was about $65 a copy. Because Laserdisks can be pressed, the promise was to be cheaper than videotape. It's the same empty promise of Compact Disc verses VHS and Compact Cassette. The studios held back the format and insisted on higher royalties for the high quality format, even though it was cheaper to duplicate. Prices on VHS came down. Prices on optical formats remained high.
Still rubbing my sore spot over the broken promises and the blatent rip-off of the cheaper to produce product, It will be a long time until I even consider any new high definition format due to the expected premium price hike.
I expect HD DVD to be very popular like the SACD format. It's crippled badly, plays much worse by design on it's red book layer, high priced, and has poor market penetration helping keeping is a snob appeal item that joe six pack will gladly leave on the shelf. It's pretty bad when they degrade the red book layer of a SACD just so the high def part looks better in a comparison. Lesson learned.. Stick with Audio CD's. They sound better and cost less and have a much larger selection.
The big problem with Laserdisks was high cost and very limited selection. They were to be a big item in video rental. DVD's have met the price points the laser disk was suppost to have reached.
By the way, I can sell my used CD's, LP's, Laserdisks, Cassette tapes, and such or give them away or give them to my kids. Have you tried it with anything from iTunes... Welcome to the wall. It's just another brick in the wall.
Anyone telling me I can burn and re-rip stuff from iTunes is simply pointing out the wall has a small brick sized hole tunes, with some effort and some damage, can fit through the wall. Later a little brick can seal up that little hole. The presense of a small hole does not negate the fact the wall is in the way.
Tear down the wall! Tear down the Wall! (Pink Floyd)
The truth shall set you free!
Bad timing bro. Several sites are already reporting that iTunes will be carrying the Beatles, not Sony. Just sayin'.
Wow, I missed it. I was under the impression The Beatles were never going to be released online. Maybe there was enough piracy that they decided they needed a few bucks instead of nothing from online content.
George Lucas did the same thing. I had a copy of the original Star Wars overseas 4 years before it come out on the vidio market.
The truth shall set you free!