if you worked for my store, and told customers not to purchase major new OS, you would be first I would fire. You can wear your badge of honor where you want, but not while working in retail industry.
how the hell do you think you get your paycheck? How does that happen?
you are making sense, but thats not what/. readers are all about... lets bash some MS for Adobe not going through FREE Certification process (MS is paying for it until June)...
40 days after PS3 started selling, BD took 70% of the HD market, with HD-DVD taking 30%. One month before that, situation was exact opposite. Thats in USA. In Japan, after PS3 introduction, BD owns 98% of the HD movie market.
If you check Hi-Def enthusiast forums, such as avforums.com, PS3 is reccomended as the BD player of choice, for both superior picture and extra features (such as near instant loading as supposed to 40 seconds wait on other players, such as Toshibas).
Sony has already won this war, as soon as PS3 was introduced. Only one major studio is left exclusivly supporting HD-DVD, and most of the HD-DVD owners are now buying BD players and becoming "format neutral" since there is not enough content on HD-DVD.
And BD is not just Sony, it is 6 out of 7 major movie studios, and 20 top electronic companies against Microsoft, Toshiba and Universal.
There is nothing wrong with the concept of DRM, in perfect world, same as there is nothing wrong with concept of DRM-FREE content in perfect world.
DRM in perfect world - download music in multiple formats, multiple bit rates - download movies in multiple formats, including smaller sizes for handhelds, and HD quality for big screen, with same purchase - easily play content in any player you device - easily transfer content to any device you want
If DRM would still give me freedom of decision as to when, where and how to play my purchased content, there is simply nothing to complain there. Case in point - Blu-Ray movies. There is nothing wrong with DRM in BD movies. Movies are playable in all players, I can borrow them to my friends, I can sell it on ebay, whatever I want. No problem there, especially since BD's are VERY durable, unlike standard DVD's.
However, content I purchase on iTunes is completly different. I can not play it where I want. I can not borrow it. I can not sell it when I am done with it. If I buy some other music player, I can not legally use my PURCHASED music on it.
Why will we never see perfect DRM situation? Because both content providers and hardware monopolists are strongly against it. Content providers know that they have limited number of people that want to purchase online content, so they to make them purchase it as many times as possible. On the other side, hardware monopolist keeps users locked in their hardware platform by not allowing them to use any other devices, with their purchased music.
DRM-FREE in perfect world - purchase content, DRM free, do whatever you want with it
This sounds really great, with exception of one problem. And that is that people will always get something for free, rather than pay for it. Most humans dont have really high moral standards, which we witness every time when we watch CNN. We have to face the fact that content producers spend considerable resources (read:money) to produce content. For instance, if game publisher spends 10mil to produce xbox game, and game is available, DRM-Free from their favorite torrent site, that publisher would easily go out of business.
Conclusion is that however you slice it, gray is the color of our world, and we cant group everything into the same bin. Music is not same as Games, and not same as the movies. DRM on xbox game is perfectly fine, because it does not take away your customer rights, and DRM on Blu-Ray movie is perfectly fine for the same reason. On the other hand, online market is currently in dark shades of gray. DRM exists only to limit you in using your purchased content and is completly wrong. I dont doubt that music companies will realize the distinction soon, especially since anyone can easily download any mp3 for free, so their DRM only ends up being the deterent to their customers and not to the pirates.
jobs did not do such thing. He simply explained why Apple will never provide DRM free music. This is what jobs said: 1. we do not WANT to open our DRM implementation 2. we do not WANT to offer DRM free music, unless all of our music is DRM free
It would be quite easy for Apple to destroy DRM on iTunes... simply provide DRM free music when publishers allow it, and once other publishers see that customers, when given choice, will buy DRM-free music, they will be forced to open their music.
2nd biggest music store in the world - eMusic.com, sells ALL of their music DRM free, so in reality, it really shouldnt be that hard for Apple to find DRM-free content.
Problem is that Apple is one of the main beneficiaries of current state of DRM, and in reality, they dont want to sell music DRM free, or use open DRM... because if they wanted to do so, they could have done it already...
Apple needs to decide - is iTMS doing good or bad? Depending on to who is Jobs talking to, we get different answers. I doubt iTMS sales made them come to their senses, since it is biggest offender in online music at this point.
In fact, labels trying to move away to DRM-Free zone might come from the fact that they dont want their music being distributed on only one hardware manufacturer (Apple)...
Actually, in the week ending Jan14th, BD outsold HD-DVD almost 3x1, not 2x1. And those are strictly retail movie sales, they dont include games or free movies.
40 days after PS3 is released, BD has 3to1 advantage over HD-DVD.
Sony sold 1mil PS3's in US in 2006, while MS sold 92,000 HD-DVD addons for Xbox.
Obviously Sony has won this war. In fact, the whole industry has won this war. Everyone but Microsoft, Toshiba and Universal is part of BD camp.
Sharing of technology is impossible. Open formats? Impossible. It has never been done before. It would be impossible for apple to share DRM because it is simply impossible. Cant you guys get it?:-)
I find it really funny how the same people that propose open formats for Office, turn around and say that "open" DRM is impossible. A lot of that "impossible" comes from monopoly of largest hardware provider.
It is impossible for Apple to open their DRM, and it is impossible for Apple to use non-DRM music, even if publishers give them rights to do so.
Job's outcry makes very little sense, and industry leaders are calling him out for it. What Jobs is saying is that they can not provide access to their DRM nor can they provide NON-DRM music if publishers allow it. So basically Jobs is claiming that he cant do anything because of the publishers, even if publishers are calling for lesser restrictions.
At the same time, one of the biggest publishers - EMI - is testing non-drm sales, of course not on iTunes, since Apple isnt allowing it. So it turns out that it is Apple who is now not allowing publishers not to use the DRM.
In general, there is no reason for general purpose app not to work under Vista, as not enough things have been changed.
99% of applications work fine.
I have been positivly suprised by number of Microsoft employees contacting us for help in getting our application working under Vista. So Microsoft went beyond expected from them to make sure applications work. Unlike Apple that simply breaks support for 3rd party without much care.
Poor steve does not want to excercise his monopoly in mp3 player market, but he has no other option! He would so much like to give iTunes store customers option to move to other devices, and he is so sad that evil, evil, evil music companies dont want him to do so. He cries very hard every night to try and find solution to license his DRM protection to other companies, but despite crying himself to death, he can find the way.
Simply technology does not exist in this day and age where Apple can provide other companies access to their DRM engine. In fact, that would destroy all computers around the world, and every mac would be instantly formatted.
So he is forced to continue his monopoly, and not enable his customers to move their music to other devices, something that he is trying to do so hard. Silly europeans dont understand that technology of apple sharing technology simply does not exist in this day and age.
as an software developer, it annoys the hell out of me when user complains about Vista issue which gets replied to with: "you know, you really should not use Vista..."
On the other hand, it seems as if things are being blown way out of proportions, what exactly should have nvidia done other to lock the thread when things go out of hand? In the interview, dude just wants to know when the final driver will be ready... well, it will be ready when it is done:-).
Out of curiosity, except for Sultan of Brunei, who owns only internet connection in Brunei, and is reportedly fibre link, what other countries have 100 Mb internet as standard?
So you are Apple fan. You dislike DRM as long as it is not by Apple. If it is by Apple, then it is ok? Interesting.
It is rather obvious that Apple's main reason for not allowing other players to play iTunes, is that they want to lock them down into buying iPod's.
Apple is monopolist that has 80% of the market. A lot like MS with their 90% of PC market. It would be rather hard to buy some other player, if you already purchased few hundred tracks on itunes, right?
So it is fine if Apple does something, and it is not fine if MS does the same thing?
I dont see much difference between those two - if anything, Apple is even more closed company that really doesnt like to play with anyone else, which is why they never had nor will they have good 3rd party developer support. MS isnt much better - them disabling plays4sure on Zune is simply horrible user experience.
Only real difference is that Apple has a lot of fans, so whenever something bad happens, thousands of fans go around blogs and websites, trying to justify Apple's actions. I wonder how long would that last?
Europe is on to something - and it is not banning of DRM BTW - it is banning DRM that doesnt allow you to play your purchased music on other devices, other players in this case.
thats completly different. More obvious would be Microsoft only allowing Windows to be used on HP PC's, and not allowing you to transfer your programs to any other PC maker.
In fact, thats what Apple has done forever now:-).
Actually creating game for Mac requires a lot of resources to be spent. Allowing iTunes music to be playable in other players takes once click.
Apple has the history of being very protective and closed company, from them closing the hardware and destroying their hardware partners, to iTunes, to iPhone with no 3rd party software.
Or rather, Apple is using DRM to force customers to continue buying Ipod's and not competing devices. By doing so, they have monopolized the market to the point that it would be very time consuming for an iTunes customer who has purchased many tracks, to move them to another player.
thats seems simple enough for everyone to understand...
And what exactly has Apple done against DRM? Nothing. There is no difference between Apple and Microsoft. At least with MS, you can share half of the songs....
If MS had 90% of mp3 market, sued every maker who tried to make their marketplace songs work in their own player, and let the users with no option than playing it on their own players (other than buring them to cd, and re-ripping them - sounds like lots of fun), Gates would have been in jail 3 years ago...
In fact, Apple is one of the biggest backers of everything DRM... one of the most closed companies in the world is Apple... MS is far from innocent little baby, but so is Apple... both are huge corporations that only care about their huge profits.
yes, because it is westinghouse problem... but lets not mention that on Slashdot of course... lets blame it on HDMI, HDCP, Sony, industry, god, all because cheapest LCD TV seller on the market doesnt have working HDMI connection.
I run company where we all telecommute - there is no real office. Due to unique nature of small company, there is no way for us to do anything but.
After 7 years, I honestly dont think it is so great. You end up working more and doing less, because you are so easily distracted at home. When you work at office, you know when your hours are, and your team is just next to you, so it ends up being much faster.
I would suppose it is even worse in large companies, since it is hard to be appreciated by your coworkers when they never see you. How do you promote someone who is telecommuting?
wow, and thus Apple has saved the world from mighty record associations by building biggest DRM store in the world and making insane amounts of profit. We are thankful to apple for providing us with means to generate profits for them.
which is why I find "tolkien fans" who say that they wont see non-jackson hobbit pretty funny. LOTR has been great success and and great movie, however it certainly did not keep to the books themselves, as any real tolkien fan could tell you.
so you have two types of toliken fans now - ones that re-read the books at least 10 times and ones that re-watched the movies 10 times but never read the book:-).
There is no big difference between Jackson and New Line - they both want more money. It is easy to argue now, but New Line got a lot of heat before movies were released for investing such huge amounts of money into the "unknown" director and movie that if it failed, might have brought the whole company down. So we have to commend both New Line for taking big risk, and giving jackson unlimited funds, and Jackson for having an vision to create such epic movie as well.
Slashdot Mirror
if you worked for my store, and told customers not to purchase major new OS, you would be first I would fire.
You can wear your badge of honor where you want, but not while working in retail industry.
how the hell do you think you get your paycheck? How does that happen?
No wonder company is going down.
you are making sense, but thats not what /. readers are all about... lets bash some MS for Adobe not going through FREE Certification process (MS is paying for it until June)...
40 days after PS3 started selling, BD took 70% of the HD market, with HD-DVD taking 30%. One month before that, situation was exact opposite. Thats in USA. In Japan, after PS3 introduction, BD owns 98% of the HD movie market.
If you check Hi-Def enthusiast forums, such as avforums.com, PS3 is reccomended as the BD player of choice, for both superior picture and extra features (such as near instant loading as supposed to 40 seconds wait on other players, such as Toshibas).
Sony has already won this war, as soon as PS3 was introduced. Only one major studio is left exclusivly supporting HD-DVD, and most of the HD-DVD owners are now buying BD players and becoming "format neutral" since there is not enough content on HD-DVD.
And BD is not just Sony, it is 6 out of 7 major movie studios, and 20 top electronic companies against Microsoft, Toshiba and Universal.
There is nothing wrong with the concept of DRM, in perfect world, same as there is nothing wrong with concept of DRM-FREE content in perfect world.
DRM in perfect world
- download music in multiple formats, multiple bit rates
- download movies in multiple formats, including smaller sizes for handhelds, and HD quality for big screen, with same purchase
- easily play content in any player you device
- easily transfer content to any device you want
If DRM would still give me freedom of decision as to when, where and how to play my purchased content, there is simply nothing to complain there.
Case in point - Blu-Ray movies. There is nothing wrong with DRM in BD movies. Movies are playable in all players, I can borrow them to my friends, I can sell it on ebay, whatever I want. No problem there, especially since BD's are VERY durable, unlike standard DVD's.
However, content I purchase on iTunes is completly different. I can not play it where I want. I can not borrow it. I can not sell it when I am done with it. If I buy some other music player, I can not legally use my PURCHASED music on it.
Why will we never see perfect DRM situation? Because both content providers and hardware monopolists are strongly against it. Content providers know that they have limited number of people that want to purchase online content, so they to make them purchase it as many times as possible. On the other side, hardware monopolist keeps users locked in their hardware platform by not allowing them to use any other devices, with their purchased music.
DRM-FREE in perfect world
- purchase content, DRM free, do whatever you want with it
This sounds really great, with exception of one problem. And that is that people will always get something for free, rather than pay for it. Most humans dont have really high moral standards, which we witness every time when we watch CNN. We have to face the fact that content producers spend considerable resources (read:money) to produce content. For instance, if game publisher spends 10mil to produce xbox game, and game is available, DRM-Free from their favorite torrent site, that publisher would easily go out of business.
Conclusion is that however you slice it, gray is the color of our world, and we cant group everything into the same bin. Music is not same as Games, and not same as the movies. DRM on xbox game is perfectly fine, because it does not take away your customer rights, and DRM on Blu-Ray movie is perfectly fine for the same reason. On the other hand, online market is currently in dark shades of gray. DRM exists only to limit you in using your purchased content and is completly wrong. I dont doubt that music companies will realize the distinction soon, especially since anyone can easily download any mp3 for free, so their DRM only ends up being the deterent to their customers and not to the pirates.
jobs did not do such thing. He simply explained why Apple will never provide DRM free music.
This is what jobs said:
1. we do not WANT to open our DRM implementation
2. we do not WANT to offer DRM free music, unless all of our music is DRM free
It would be quite easy for Apple to destroy DRM on iTunes... simply provide DRM free music when publishers allow it, and once other publishers see that customers, when given choice, will buy DRM-free music, they will be forced to open their music.
2nd biggest music store in the world - eMusic.com, sells ALL of their music DRM free, so in reality, it really shouldnt be that hard for Apple to find DRM-free content.
Problem is that Apple is one of the main beneficiaries of current state of DRM, and in reality, they dont want to sell music DRM free, or use open DRM... because if they wanted to do so, they could have done it already...
so basically apple tv doesnt need dolby digital surround because all you need is stereo headphones... good, good...
Apple needs to decide - is iTMS doing good or bad? Depending on to who is Jobs talking to, we get different answers.
I doubt iTMS sales made them come to their senses, since it is biggest offender in online music at this point.
In fact, labels trying to move away to DRM-Free zone might come from the fact that they dont want their music being distributed on only one hardware manufacturer (Apple)...
Actually, in the week ending Jan14th, BD outsold HD-DVD almost 3x1, not 2x1.
And those are strictly retail movie sales, they dont include games or free movies.
40 days after PS3 is released, BD has 3to1 advantage over HD-DVD.
Sony sold 1mil PS3's in US in 2006, while MS sold 92,000 HD-DVD addons for Xbox.
Obviously Sony has won this war. In fact, the whole industry has won this war. Everyone but Microsoft, Toshiba and Universal is part of BD camp.
of course, free software is not free as beer, and there are restrictions to being free :-)
Sharing of technology is impossible. Open formats? Impossible. It has never been done before. :-)
It would be impossible for apple to share DRM because it is simply impossible. Cant you guys get it?
I find it really funny how the same people that propose open formats for Office, turn around and say that "open" DRM is impossible. A lot of that "impossible" comes from monopoly of largest hardware provider.
It is impossible for Apple to open their DRM, and it is impossible for Apple to use non-DRM music, even if publishers give them rights to do so.
Job's outcry makes very little sense, and industry leaders are calling him out for it. What Jobs is saying is that they can not provide access to their DRM nor can they provide NON-DRM music if publishers allow it. So basically Jobs is claiming that he cant do anything because of the publishers, even if publishers are calling for lesser restrictions.
At the same time, one of the biggest publishers - EMI - is testing non-drm sales, of course not on iTunes, since Apple isnt allowing it.
So it turns out that it is Apple who is now not allowing publishers not to use the DRM.
In general, there is no reason for general purpose app not to work under Vista, as not enough things have been changed.
99% of applications work fine.
I have been positivly suprised by number of Microsoft employees contacting us for help in getting our application working under Vista.
So Microsoft went beyond expected from them to make sure applications work. Unlike Apple that simply breaks support for 3rd party without much care.
huh? having monopoly at early stages is bad? Really...
How about taking Economics 101 before you post such outrageously silly statements.
wow...Apple fan boys unite.
Poor steve does not want to excercise his monopoly in mp3 player market, but he has no other option!
He would so much like to give iTunes store customers option to move to other devices, and he is so sad that evil, evil, evil music companies dont want him to do so. He cries very hard every night to try and find solution to license his DRM protection to other companies, but despite crying himself to death, he can find the way.
Simply technology does not exist in this day and age where Apple can provide other companies access to their DRM engine. In fact, that would destroy all computers around the world, and every mac would be instantly formatted.
So he is forced to continue his monopoly, and not enable his customers to move their music to other devices, something that he is trying to do so hard. Silly europeans dont understand that technology of apple sharing technology simply does not exist in this day and age.
as an software developer, it annoys the hell out of me when user complains about Vista issue which gets replied to with: "you know, you really should not use Vista..."
:-).
On the other hand, it seems as if things are being blown way out of proportions, what exactly should have nvidia done other to lock the thread when things go out of hand? In the interview, dude just wants to know when the final driver will be ready... well, it will be ready when it is done
no, that promotion ended in december with first 500,000 PS3 sold in the USA.
In week of Jan 14th, BD had almost 3:1 lead over HD-DVD.
Out of curiosity, except for Sultan of Brunei, who owns only internet connection in Brunei, and is reportedly fibre link, what other countries have 100 Mb internet as standard?
So you are Apple fan. You dislike DRM as long as it is not by Apple. If it is by Apple, then it is ok? Interesting.
It is rather obvious that Apple's main reason for not allowing other players to play iTunes, is that they want to lock them down into buying iPod's.
Apple is monopolist that has 80% of the market. A lot like MS with their 90% of PC market. It would be rather hard to buy some other player, if you already purchased few hundred tracks on itunes, right?
So it is fine if Apple does something, and it is not fine if MS does the same thing?
I dont see much difference between those two - if anything, Apple is even more closed company that really doesnt like to play with anyone else, which is why they never had nor will they have good 3rd party developer support. MS isnt much better - them disabling plays4sure on Zune is simply horrible user experience.
Only real difference is that Apple has a lot of fans, so whenever something bad happens, thousands of fans go around blogs and websites, trying to justify Apple's actions. I wonder how long would that last?
Europe is on to something - and it is not banning of DRM BTW - it is banning DRM that doesnt allow you to play your purchased music on other devices, other players in this case.
thats completly different. More obvious would be Microsoft only allowing Windows to be used on HP PC's, and not allowing you to transfer your programs to any other PC maker.
:-).
In fact, thats what Apple has done forever now
Actually creating game for Mac requires a lot of resources to be spent. Allowing iTunes music to be playable in other players takes once click.
Apple has the history of being very protective and closed company, from them closing the hardware and destroying their hardware partners, to iTunes, to iPhone with no 3rd party software.
Or rather, Apple is using DRM to force customers to continue buying Ipod's and not competing devices. By doing so, they have monopolized the market to the point that it would be very time consuming for an iTunes customer who has purchased many tracks, to move them to another player.
thats seems simple enough for everyone to understand...
And what exactly has Apple done against DRM? Nothing. There is no difference between Apple and Microsoft.
At least with MS, you can share half of the songs....
If MS had 90% of mp3 market, sued every maker who tried to make their marketplace songs work in their own player, and let the users with no option than playing it on their own players (other than buring them to cd, and re-ripping them - sounds like lots of fun), Gates would have been in jail 3 years ago...
In fact, Apple is one of the biggest backers of everything DRM... one of the most closed companies in the world is Apple...
MS is far from innocent little baby, but so is Apple... both are huge corporations that only care about their huge profits.
yes, because it is westinghouse problem... but lets not mention that on Slashdot of course... lets blame it on HDMI, HDCP, Sony, industry, god, all because cheapest LCD TV seller on the market doesnt have working HDMI connection.
I run company where we all telecommute - there is no real office. Due to unique nature of small company, there is no way for us to do anything but.
After 7 years, I honestly dont think it is so great. You end up working more and doing less, because you are so easily distracted at home.
When you work at office, you know when your hours are, and your team is just next to you, so it ends up being much faster.
I would suppose it is even worse in large companies, since it is hard to be appreciated by your coworkers when they never see you. How do you promote someone who is telecommuting?
wow, and thus Apple has saved the world from mighty record associations by building biggest DRM store in the world and making insane amounts of profit. We are thankful to apple for providing us with means to generate profits for them.
which is why I find "tolkien fans" who say that they wont see non-jackson hobbit pretty funny.
:-).
LOTR has been great success and and great movie, however it certainly did not keep to the books themselves, as any real tolkien fan could tell you.
so you have two types of toliken fans now - ones that re-read the books at least 10 times and ones that re-watched the movies 10 times but never read the book
There is no big difference between Jackson and New Line - they both want more money. It is easy to argue now, but New Line got a lot of heat before movies were released for investing such huge amounts of money into the "unknown" director and movie that if it failed, might have brought the whole company down. So we have to commend both New Line for taking big risk, and giving jackson unlimited funds, and Jackson for having an vision to create such epic movie as well.
BD already won, didnt you read anything over past 7 days?