They have "quite a few tracks" but not enough, because the labels won't let them sell without implementing DRM. Show me a music store that uses PlaysForSure, or has no DRM at all that has even 1/3rd of the library of major artists that iTunes has. I'm not sure when people will understand that it is not Apple, but the recording industry, that is forcing DRM on us.
If you take the word Apple out of your sentence, I'd say good post. The reason iTunes Music Store has the majority of artists is because the labels allow their songs to be sold there, BECAUSE of DRM. Otherwise, you get the puny 1-3 million song libraries of the "competitors", such as eMusic and the Yahoo store.
The only thing stopping Apple from developing playsforsure support into the iPod is that there is no demand for playsforsure on iPods. If people wanted playsforsure support, they would buy a player that supports that format. Evidently, customers are content with MP3, AAC, AIFF, and WAV playback, and have little interest in playsforsure. The sales numbers speak for themselves. I personally would like to be able to use iTunes+iPod for subscription based music service, but I don't expect or demand Apple to make it happen for me.
The previous post didn't mention reripping, but while we are at it: yes, that is another completely legitimate work-around. The "fidelity loss" argument is tired.
If iTunes is the music player software, and iTunes Music Store is one of the features inside of the program, then technically speaking, they want to outlaw one feature of a software app? Just checking my logic here...
Well so what if I do like my "Ivory Tower" Intel iMac? Isn't that the whole point of market? I have a choice, and I chosen a non ATX-form computer that is more elegant, better built and more reliable than the last three ATX boards I've had. You have your choice too. You choose the flexibility and interoperability of standard ATX-form parts. However, you don't see me out there trying to legislate everything that doesn't match my likings. Instead of bitching about how bad Microsoft Windows is or how awful my Taiwan/Korea built motherboards have been, I just went out and bought a MacBook and a 20" iMac. That served my copmuting needs just fine, but probably wouldn't serve yours. Then again, it is my money, so I don't really care what you choose.
Well I for one think Apple has covered their ass fairly well. The iPod play non iTunes songs, and you can play iTunes songs on any device with a cd player.
I can name 20 US cities that trump most of these nominees, and most of those are in the bay area of California. I won't bother to give out other nominees like Austin, TX or Portland, OR, because they are entirely too livable compared to some of the cities in that list. Cleveland is the best they could muster for the US last year? Please...
Pasta, rice, bread, etc. are all bad news as they are all empty calories, they provide little or no nutrition
Care to ellaborate? Seems to me that people who eat rice predominantly are the most slender people on Earth. This is an article about being fat, not about eating empty calories and making us skinny.
I'm not lazy and Leeds is only 15 miles away. It would take 5 minutes in the US to drive that far, but it takes 45 mintues in this gawd-awful cramped-ass country!;-)
In the US in almost every city the entire road system is built on the premise that you have a car and that you will drive directly from your garage straight to the parking lot of wherever you are going and do almost no walking at all.
And this is bad because? I've lived in cities like Eugene and Portland, Oregon, and Austin, TX, and they are plenty sprawling, yet they are some of the most fit cities in the U.S.
Just because someone likes the convenience of a car doesn't make them lazy or out of shape. I drive everywhere, even here in England, because it is convenient and more economical than wasting hours a day on public transportation. I enjoy running and log 15-20 miles a week, so I don't need people lecturing me about being lazy because I drive 15 miles to Leeds to go to the movies.
People expect lower prices when they receive less and when it costs less to distribute.
Yeah, because servers are free, and online store content managers, system designers, software engineers, marketing agents and graphic design teams all work for less than a brick-and-mortar operation?
Why not just pay what you think it is worth, not what you think it costs the company to sell it to you?
Your Everquest/World of Warcraft analogy is a good one. The only thing is that the iPod is the WoW and whatever junk existed before it was the Everquest. The attraction of World of Warcraft is that it is easy to play, much like the iPod is an easy device to operate. Everquest probably had zillions of role-playing customizations and minutae fit only for hard core gamers and tweakers. iPods are the anti-tweaker's music player of choice, and suprise!...most people aren't nerd tweakers.
The iPod wasn't an overnight blockbuster success either. It was released in 2001 and cost $400. People saw it as a high priced gadget but coveted it. It took a couple years for the price to come down and then it really took off.
I think the fact more people started seeing iPods in action, caused more people to buy them, which caused more exposure, which caused more people to want one. I see the same thing happening with Macs. It isn't like Macs have been crap for 23 years, and suddenly became good because of Intel processors. Macs are merely getting to the point where they have enough exposure that people know about them and how good they can be.
The phone *is* the device that other consumer devices migrate into - its the electronic Swiss Army Knife.
I think the success of the iPod proves that people don't want Swiss Army knife-like devices. By trying to be evertyhing, most phones are good at nothing.
Yes, we Apple shareholders should also point out that "Think Different" is perfect grammar. The statement is telling us what to think, not how to think (differently).
You didn't think through the location of the power button on the iMac like the design people at Apple did. I actually own a 20" iMac and thought it was weird too at first, to have the button on the back. The reason is purely functional; if the button were on the front of the monitor, the screen would be tilted down every time you turned it on. With the button in the back, your thumb keeps the screen from tilting as you press the button with your fingers. Also, the button is placed EXACTLY where your hand naturally falls when you reach under OR around to turn it on. Finally, the appearance of a beveled button on the front would break up the clean design of the computer. It seems like a small thing, but the sum of all the small things with Macs is what makes them great. Not everyone gets it, which is why there are more Windows "Good Enough" boxes around.
Fair enough, you don't like it, because you are used to other ways of computing. This is the #1 reason, in my opinion, that people don't like Macs. They get trapped into a Windows-centric logic and when a Mac doesn't work like Windows, it freaks them out..suddenly, Macs suck, because ctrl+alt+del isn't a valid way to kill a crashed app. Once you show someone that you simply right click an unresponsive programs' icon in the dock and choose "force quit", or show them to go to the Apple menu, and choose force quit there (or see the keyboard shortcut there), they stop thinking in windows terms. Suddenly, Macs don't suck.
In other words, we should dismiss anyone's post that doesn't have a working knowledge of both systems and who can't use logic to make a point.
I have the same G4 AGP, still running strong, and it has had OS X on it from the first day 10.0 was available as a beta. I have two users on it, and on a MacBook and an Intel iMac. I have never had a permission issue with any of these machines. Perhaps if people would quit locking down their machines so tightly they'd actually be able to use them.
On our two pcs (both less than 3 years old) I've reinstalled Windows XP 5 times. In 20 years of Mac OS I've reinstalled a system OS never times.
People love to bitch about things, and windows is one of those things that gives them water-cooler topics. I love going into the breakroom at work an listening to all the PC-lovers bitch about the latest problem with their PC.
People ARE stupid, and most people are clueless about computers. My wife took her MacBook into work to hook up to an HDTV for Army training. The Sergeant before her had his Windows laptop, and of course, couldn't get it to hook up to the tv to display his PowerPoint presentation. My wife hooked up the MacBook, and turned it on, and was given her brief in about 30 seconds. The other guy mentioned somewhat jealously, that he would like to have her MacBook, but since it doesn't run PowerPoint (because it is a Mac?) he couldn't buy one. My wife then took his thumb drive, hooked it up to the USB port, pulled down his presentation, and let him do his brief. "I didn't know Macs had Office!"
If I had a nickel for every Army presentation I had to go to that had problems with the projector or the tv, I'd be buying Bill Gates out right now. I think I'm actually taking my MacBook with me every where I go, just to bail out those suckers who have bought into the concept that "I have to have a pc for work!"
Slashdot Mirror
We heard this before in about, what, 1997? WebTV worked out so well didn't it? Give up, Bill, and go back to copying Apple.
Can you access the iTMS without iTunes installed? I'm just asking, because that would be helpful at work ;-)
They have "quite a few tracks" but not enough, because the labels won't let them sell without implementing DRM. Show me a music store that uses PlaysForSure, or has no DRM at all that has even 1/3rd of the library of major artists that iTunes has. I'm not sure when people will understand that it is not Apple, but the recording industry, that is forcing DRM on us.
If you take the word Apple out of your sentence, I'd say good post. The reason iTunes Music Store has the majority of artists is because the labels allow their songs to be sold there, BECAUSE of DRM. Otherwise, you get the puny 1-3 million song libraries of the "competitors", such as eMusic and the Yahoo store.
The only thing stopping Apple from developing playsforsure support into the iPod is that there is no demand for playsforsure on iPods. If people wanted playsforsure support, they would buy a player that supports that format. Evidently, customers are content with MP3, AAC, AIFF, and WAV playback, and have little interest in playsforsure. The sales numbers speak for themselves. I personally would like to be able to use iTunes+iPod for subscription based music service, but I don't expect or demand Apple to make it happen for me.
The previous post didn't mention reripping, but while we are at it: yes, that is another completely legitimate work-around. The "fidelity loss" argument is tired.
If iTunes is the music player software, and iTunes Music Store is one of the features inside of the program, then technically speaking, they want to outlaw one feature of a software app? Just checking my logic here...
Well so what if I do like my "Ivory Tower" Intel iMac? Isn't that the whole point of market? I have a choice, and I chosen a non ATX-form computer that is more elegant, better built and more reliable than the last three ATX boards I've had. You have your choice too. You choose the flexibility and interoperability of standard ATX-form parts. However, you don't see me out there trying to legislate everything that doesn't match my likings. Instead of bitching about how bad Microsoft Windows is or how awful my Taiwan/Korea built motherboards have been, I just went out and bought a MacBook and a 20" iMac. That served my copmuting needs just fine, but probably wouldn't serve yours. Then again, it is my money, so I don't really care what you choose.
Well I for one think Apple has covered their ass fairly well. The iPod play non iTunes songs, and you can play iTunes songs on any device with a cd player.
The article should have read: "Norway Outlaws Capitalism."
I can name 20 US cities that trump most of these nominees, and most of those are in the bay area of California. I won't bother to give out other nominees like Austin, TX or Portland, OR, because they are entirely too livable compared to some of the cities in that list. Cleveland is the best they could muster for the US last year? Please...
I'm not lazy and Leeds is only 15 miles away. It would take 5 minutes in the US to drive that far, but it takes 45 mintues in this gawd-awful cramped-ass country! ;-)
Just because someone likes the convenience of a car doesn't make them lazy or out of shape. I drive everywhere, even here in England, because it is convenient and more economical than wasting hours a day on public transportation. I enjoy running and log 15-20 miles a week, so I don't need people lecturing me about being lazy because I drive 15 miles to Leeds to go to the movies.
Why not just pay what you think it is worth, not what you think it costs the company to sell it to you?
Your Everquest/World of Warcraft analogy is a good one. The only thing is that the iPod is the WoW and whatever junk existed before it was the Everquest. The attraction of World of Warcraft is that it is easy to play, much like the iPod is an easy device to operate. Everquest probably had zillions of role-playing customizations and minutae fit only for hard core gamers and tweakers. iPods are the anti-tweaker's music player of choice, and suprise!...most people aren't nerd tweakers.
Yes, we Apple shareholders should also point out that "Think Different" is perfect grammar. The statement is telling us what to think, not how to think (differently).
Apple desktops have a true delete key. The MacBook doesn't, but I'm sure many PC laptops don't have fully functioning keyboards either.
You didn't think through the location of the power button on the iMac like the design people at Apple did. I actually own a 20" iMac and thought it was weird too at first, to have the button on the back. The reason is purely functional; if the button were on the front of the monitor, the screen would be tilted down every time you turned it on. With the button in the back, your thumb keeps the screen from tilting as you press the button with your fingers. Also, the button is placed EXACTLY where your hand naturally falls when you reach under OR around to turn it on. Finally, the appearance of a beveled button on the front would break up the clean design of the computer. It seems like a small thing, but the sum of all the small things with Macs is what makes them great. Not everyone gets it, which is why there are more Windows "Good Enough" boxes around.
In other words, we should dismiss anyone's post that doesn't have a working knowledge of both systems and who can't use logic to make a point.
On our two pcs (both less than 3 years old) I've reinstalled Windows XP 5 times. In 20 years of Mac OS I've reinstalled a system OS never times.
People ARE stupid, and most people are clueless about computers. My wife took her MacBook into work to hook up to an HDTV for Army training. The Sergeant before her had his Windows laptop, and of course, couldn't get it to hook up to the tv to display his PowerPoint presentation. My wife hooked up the MacBook, and turned it on, and was given her brief in about 30 seconds. The other guy mentioned somewhat jealously, that he would like to have her MacBook, but since it doesn't run PowerPoint (because it is a Mac?) he couldn't buy one. My wife then took his thumb drive, hooked it up to the USB port, pulled down his presentation, and let him do his brief. "I didn't know Macs had Office!"
If I had a nickel for every Army presentation I had to go to that had problems with the projector or the tv, I'd be buying Bill Gates out right now. I think I'm actually taking my MacBook with me every where I go, just to bail out those suckers who have bought into the concept that "I have to have a pc for work!"