I'd go for that, just because I like listening to NPR, and at work they have an overly strict "no audio downloads at all" policy. With my iPod and a radio tuner, I'd have the best of both worlds. And I know - I can by an add on, but it's not the same.
Even Michael doubts it's true and we all how about his political leanings. As for the big thing in his back -- may I be the first to make the obvious suggestion: bullet-proof vest?
I could buy that one, but I'm voting for "back massager" or some such. It could explain the "hunching" if he had pulled some muscles in his shoulders, and it was a poorly applied heat pack or some such.
If it was a bullet proof vest, my only question would be: why? With everyone being screened, did he receive a "credible threat" that "someone" might try to attack him here? Are they make him wear one all the time "just in case"? Paranoia? Or do they make him feel safe?
One of the questions I've seen regarding hydrogen is "OK, less pollution - but how are we going to get the hydrogen without using up even more energy?"
I keep wondering why solar can't provide some of this. Build a series of solar panels, collect water (say from a local river), break down the water into H2+O, let the latter out into the air and keep the former for fuel.
Is solar not strong enough/inconsistent enough for such an endeavor? Sure, you'd need a large area with a local water supply (again, a river might be nice), and probably a backup generator for when there wasn't enough sunlight, but overall you'd probably have a very efficient and low-pollution system.
Though perhaps there are engineering issues I'm not aware of. Any energy geeks out there want to help me out?
We were moving from California, and my father was telling me about Washington. "It's all green," he told us. "Not like these brown dry hills - it's all green all the time, even in the winter. You'll love it!"
We moved May of 1981. About a week after the eruptions, and my first impression of Washington was ash gray. Ash gray everywhere, like snowflakes that refused to melt. You'd sweep it off the porch, maybe if you were unlucky shovel it away. Eventually, it dissolved and the rains of Washington carried it away, but for months, even a year or two afterwards, you'd wake up to a light dusting on the grass.
I mean, the original movie version. When was that made - 1960's, 1970's or so?
It is probably the quintessential sci-fi movie: the professor and the "cute girl" trying to survive a terrible horror, the place of faith and science, and then the classic ending - with a bit on the usefulness (or, uselessness) of atomic energy.
I need to get the DVD of that and show it to my kids. I don't think this is nostalgia talking (I hate nostalgia the way some people hate liver), but some of the sci-fi movies of the 60's-70's had more style, or at least made more sense and prompted deeper questions.
Look at "The Time Machine". The original left you wondering "You know, if I was going to rebuild civilization, what three books would you take?" I remember having discussions with people over this issue, the sheer philosophy and rational behind such a decision.
The modern version? You wondered how the hell those guys grew brains out of their spines, and how Weena learned English. Yeah. Lots of thought put in there.
Has Apple avoided this problem?
on
Beatles vs Apple
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
The store in question is not the "Apple Music Store" - it's the "iTunes Music Store". It would appear that, under the terms of the agreement, Apple has done everything it could to avoid using the Apple logo - save for the part in the store where it says "Copyright Apple Computer, Inc" - which is more than enough to establish it being different from "Apple Records".
As far as the previous posts about Apple Computer buying out Apple Record - why the hell not? It would ensure that the Beatles music would only be available via the iTMS - not that I am stating this is a "good" or "bad" thing (bad, if they stop selling CD's, good otherwise), and would truly cement Apple into the music business, while removing a pain in the ass.
Actually, this would be kind of interesting. I've read the original series (my father named one of my sisters after Dejah Therece, the Princess of Mars) and loved the sheer retro campty style of the "smiling Virginian" sword fighting his way across the Red Planet.
If done "so seriously it's fun" like Sky Captain appears, it could be one hell of a ride. If nothing else, I love a good swashbuckling movie.
I was talking to the CIO of a major health organization who had commissioned his engineers to find a solution to the problem of people bringing in their USB flash drives. Since he's worried about patient privacy, there's the fear that somebody would be inside, stick in a USB drive, copy data and walk out.
I know - "but what if they use a notepad, dummy". Yes, there is that problem - but last time I checked, you can steal a ton more data via a USB drive than a piece of paper.
The engineers answer? Epoxy glue in the USB slots. Not the best choice.
So for places that have to deal with security, this is good for two reasons. First, it prevents people from taking data through alternate methods (USB/Firewire drives). Second, it lets people with those devices bring them into the lab.
Take the iPod example. If you're working in one of my secure labs, I might tell you "sorry - leave it outside". But with this technology, I can say "Sure - bring it in and listen to your tunes" with a reasonable level of surety that they're not to go copy data they shouldn't.
So from my mind, this is a Good Thing, and I'd like to see it on my OS X/Linux machines as well.
Apple should probably know by now that the iPod has a lot of "value added" potential, outside of the music player.
It functions exceptionally as an MP3/AAC/AIFF/Audible player - no dispute about that. It works well as an audio recorder from what I've heard. And it also functions "decently" as a calendar/address book/note taker.
Apple might be seeing something beyond a "video iPod". Personally, based on what Mr. Jobs has said, I'd be surprised if it went that route. Most people I know don't care to be watching video as they walk/exercise/work/drive.
But what if the iPod became more of a hub? Take the current Airport Express device - 802.11 device plus audio player and print server. What if your iPod could wirelessly transmit audio to it, so you wouldn't need another computer on all the time - just pick up the iPod, and it would be like a little remote. Or you enter the room with your iPod, and the Airport Express starts playing what's on there, so you have seamless music from your earphones to your speakers.
Imagine if that could be done with video as well - just take the videos you made with iMovie or one of Apple's major movie editors, and plunk it onto the iPod. Now you can go to the other room and demo the movie on the TV set.
Remember how The Lord of the Rings was downloaded onto iPods and transferred to the editing room? Imagine a digital video camera that, instead of a small tape, just plugged in an iPod - direct from video to hard drive, and then just plug it into the computer and edit away. Or, if you have a digital camera, same thing - and now you can wirelessly transmit those photos to your computer for editing/emailing and the like.
So rather than a "video iPod", I wonder if Apple won't make the iPod an extension of the "digital hub" idea. Of course, knowing Apple, those features will work best with a Mac - but if they get other companies like HP to jump on the bandwagon and support these functions with their devices and software, Apple won't care - they'll still be selling iPods and cashing in the checks at the bank.
Then he should apply at my job. We're an employee owned company with one of the tightest ethical boards I've ever seen - because we know if we get one shred of indecent rumor about us, we're out of business.
There are companies who's bottom line is affected by honest - and we'll hire the snitches any day of the week as proof.
Groaners all, and since everybody wants one, let's get them on the floor:
Now, "I have a bone" to pick with you has a whole new meaning!
Hey, is that a jawbone growing out of your shoulder or are you just happy to see me?
Great - I hear Johnson grew another mouth. Now I'll be getting it in both ears.
I, for one, welcome our shoulder jawbone overlords.
OK, now in seriousness, I think this is a great achievement. Flash forward 10-12 years, and imagine what this could do for other organs. Regrow a finger or a hand for amputees maybe? Suppose we get to work on other organs, such as the heart? Old guy in his 60's can just have new organs regrown to extend his healthy life expectancy to 150 years?
Of course, there's the whole "stem cell and cloning" issues that might come to play when we're talking about organs and not bones, but still, this is a very exciting first step. Congrats to the doctor and patient.
My wife went through something like this. At the time, we were just dating, but the situation was the same. She had seen some "accounting irregularities", contacted the FBI and discovered her boss was into all sorts of illegal crap. So she brought in the papers to them over the course of several months.
She wound up getting another job not too long after, and we didn't have to go into something weird like witness protection or some such. But it was a little freaky, and it's probably the reason why I wound up marrying her: I knew that she'd do the right thing no matter what. If nothing else, she would keep me honest.
My apologies - I was highlighting how some people will avoid any kind of technology that increases efficiency because of assumed privacy concerns. There are real issues out there, to be certain.
On the other hand, I've experienced a lot more fear at simple things, like credit cards. Working in retail as a young man, I had plenty of people telling me they were "tools of Satan to bring us under a one world government". No kidding.
Yeah, I'm worried when I hear that companies want your movements tracked just to rent a car, or companies that want my DNA. On the other hand, a national ID doesn't bother me, since it's just like my social security card (just with my picture on it).
So there's a balance, and I was addressing those who go way to the other spectrum of "paranoid fear" rather than "healthy suspicion".
I must say, I like a lot of the ideas - even if I think that many of them (such as the car driving itself) is about 10 years too early on his time table. Not because we technologically can't do it - but because of the politics.
Take the urine testing/saliva testing devices. Personally, I wouldn't sweat over it. Car driving itself? Sure - go for it!
But there are those who will fear their loss of privacy (you can track where I go on the road through all the sensors! The Bible says that the Anti-Christ will put computer chips on our foreheads - cars are the first step!).
I love the wake-up system. I believe I read about something like that in Scientific American once - a column about a gentleman who created a hack that would open his blinds a little at a time based on the alarm clock, so that when he was suppose to be awake, he was being his full on the face with sunlight, a little at a time. Then he modified it to just lights, so you didn't need the blinds. But brain wave monitoring? Personally, that's fine with me, as long as my wife doesn't discover my secret dream involving her, Utena and Selfie Tilmitt in a hot tub full of green lime jello.
But a lot of people will balk at some things for reasons of fear. I still like a lot of the ideas, and who knows - a good chunk of them might come true. I personally hope the concepts of "data analyses and understanding over memorization" comes true. I get so frustrated when I hear the words "No open book tests". Last time I checked, my boss didn't tell me to make a program, then told me he'd fire me if I opened a book or looked up the data I needed through the newsgroups. Why? Because he knows that my ability to think through the data and see what's been done before is the reason he hired me, not to be able to rattle off information that might or might not apply at this second.
I mean, that's what we have MCSE's for. (And yes, I'm one of those too;) ).
2. AFAIK, nobody is licensing Fairplay from Apple. Therefore, it's not a profit-center. And, thus far, there's no evidence to show that it ever will be.
Sorry, I was trying to imagine a "period in the future" where such items are commodotized, and a possibility that Apple might go towards. Naturally, in your wisdom I'm sure you can see that since nobody "knows" the future, this is all guesswork on our part.
My apologies if you believed that I was actually making "real" (no pun intended) predictions of the future, rather than just a "what if" exercise to explain to the parent poster why Apple wouldn't want people to play in the Fairplay arena.
Are you really so naive to think that just because you can't concieve of how they might profit from iPod sales, that they must not be profitable at all? If so, then that is exactly the reason that they're the ones selling 'em by the boatload, and you're not.
Again, I was just bringing up possibilities, not actual facts of the future. Please unknot the panties, remember that a lot of this discussion boils down to navel gazing, and have a nice yummy hot chocolate. It will put things in perspective.
Look at today. For the DRM crowd (so we can throw out MP3 and Ogg files), there are 3 systems in competition:
Microsoft WMA (in the most stores, about 25% of the market) Sony (in one store, let's give them 5%) Apple Fairplay (70% of the market)
Where's Real in this? I'm not even going to give them that much credit - this is about why Apple doesn't want others playing in its Fairplay system.
Right now, who's making money?
Napster - losing money on selling music Sony - supplemented by hardware sales Apple - maybe they make money off of iTMS, but they make money from selling iPods Microsoft - licensing fees every time somebody buys a WMA song
Recently, some companies who sell "Pirate proof" CD's have announced they're dropping WMA and going with something "iPod compatible". Why? Because 70% of the DRM market is in the hands of the iPod.
Now, you're response is right: if more people used Fairplay, or some hacked version, then Apple would sell more iPods, and they'd make more money.
You're right - as of the year 2004.
Now, let's jump in the magic time machine and head to 2014. Now, here's a possible look at the market:
DRM music files: WMA (5%), Sony (5%), Apple 95%. Real - somewhere between 0-1%.
iPods cost $99 for a 100G hard drive - enough to store so much music its silly. Even adding in PDA and visual abilities, it's still so much storage Apple makes hardly anything selling iPods.
But! They make millions a year because everybody uses their DRM system, and everybody has to license with Apple to play it.
Imagine Steve Jobs sitting in the Jobs Cave thinking "What if by 2010, Microsoft has to pay Apple every time they sell a Windows computer, because they need the Fairplay codec? That could mean millions of dollars a year "just because".
That is why they don't want others selling songs: why bother? If they can get Real to kick the bucket so that all in the world is either WMA or Fairplay (and the former only supported via monopoly money - no, not the Parker Brothers kind), then Apple will rule the future of online music, and put them in a position to make a lot of money in the future.
Don't just look at "hardware sales now". I think Steve learned his lesson from a long time ago (which is "hardware sales aren't always king"), and he's looking at the long term. Odds are, he'll release Fairplay to others (*cough*HP and Motoroloa*cough*) when he's ready to, and get people to join his vision.
Is he right or wrong? I don't worry. Last time I checked, my iPod still works great with music CD's I buy in the store. But at least now you know.
Millions of people wouldn't have known what Janet Jackson's left breast looked like.
I only know because I was out of the room during the halftime show, missed it, had no idea what occured, then within hours had various friends of mine with PVR's sending me the files via email.
And all I could think as I looked at them was "Eh - my wife's are better. And probably more real."
Is when we all have computers embedded in our skin, and they start placing spam in our foods to transmit messages to us.
No, not Spam. The other kind. Then again, you have to wonder just what a virus would do to this information transmitting proteins. No, not that kind of virus, the other kind.
No, I don't know which kind either. I just confused myself.
I'm surprised some other intelligent company hasn't done this, a la Apple. Take the best of the base, make the GUI idiot proof and possibly proprietary (so no more "KDE is better, Gnome is better), and you've got almost instant money if you put in an X11 plug (so all those yummy Gimp, etc programs work) so you've got instant application list.
It would take about 3-4 years to develop right (again, see the OS X model), but you could rule the roost if you did it right.
I wonder if this is an example of Microsoft trying to be the "end all, be all" of everything, and it's finally catching up with them.
So far, they have 4 sources of real revenue:
Windows OS/Server Office Development Tool Sales Some hardware (mice, keyboards, etc)
Everything else that MS is involved in has been money losing ventures. Cell phones, PDA, cable TV, "Ultimate TV" - heck, the "raging successful Xbox" has lost over $2 billion for the company (and if that's success, I'd hate to see what failure is).
MS has $56 billion in the bank (some cash, some investments), and so far, revenues are still outstripping costs. But I think Ballmer can look ahead and read the writing on the wall. Other than the MS tax on computers (yes, it exists, deal with it), people aren't rushing out to upgrade with every new OS release. Lots of folks are still on Windows 98/2000 Server and Office 95.
So what will be cut away? WIll they just reduce the number of employees? Shift more developers to India? Or cut on some projects and say "OK, so we're not going to take over the cable market."
Odds are, MS is, as the article mentions, just going through a "mid-life crisis". They'll either recoup, tighten down, and keep chugging along - or just proceed with "business as usual" for all their talk, then wonder 5 years from now why all of the business are running Slinux (simple Linux - easy enough for Grandma to figure out how to change the screen resolution) or Apple OS X instead of Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd go for that, just because I like listening to NPR, and at work they have an overly strict "no audio downloads at all" policy. With my iPod and a radio tuner, I'd have the best of both worlds. And I know - I can by an add on, but it's not the same.
I could buy that one, but I'm voting for "back massager" or some such. It could explain the "hunching" if he had pulled some muscles in his shoulders, and it was a poorly applied heat pack or some such.
If it was a bullet proof vest, my only question would be: why? With everyone being screened, did he receive a "credible threat" that "someone" might try to attack him here? Are they make him wear one all the time "just in case"? Paranoia? Or do they make him feel safe?
One of the questions I've seen regarding hydrogen is "OK, less pollution - but how are we going to get the hydrogen without using up even more energy?"
I keep wondering why solar can't provide some of this. Build a series of solar panels, collect water (say from a local river), break down the water into H2+O, let the latter out into the air and keep the former for fuel.
Is solar not strong enough/inconsistent enough for such an endeavor? Sure, you'd need a large area with a local water supply (again, a river might be nice), and probably a backup generator for when there wasn't enough sunlight, but overall you'd probably have a very efficient and low-pollution system.
Though perhaps there are engineering issues I'm not aware of. Any energy geeks out there want to help me out?
We were moving from California, and my father was telling me about Washington. "It's all green," he told us. "Not like these brown dry hills - it's all green all the time, even in the winter. You'll love it!"
We moved May of 1981. About a week after the eruptions, and my first impression of Washington was ash gray. Ash gray everywhere, like snowflakes that refused to melt. You'd sweep it off the porch, maybe if you were unlucky shovel it away. Eventually, it dissolved and the rains of Washington carried it away, but for months, even a year or two afterwards, you'd wake up to a light dusting on the grass.
Square-Enix can finally achieve the dream of turning Final Fantasy XIV into nothing more than a 50 hour movie with save spots in between!
I mean, the original movie version. When was that made - 1960's, 1970's or so?
It is probably the quintessential sci-fi movie: the professor and the "cute girl" trying to survive a terrible horror, the place of faith and science, and then the classic ending - with a bit on the usefulness (or, uselessness) of atomic energy.
I need to get the DVD of that and show it to my kids. I don't think this is nostalgia talking (I hate nostalgia the way some people hate liver), but some of the sci-fi movies of the 60's-70's had more style, or at least made more sense and prompted deeper questions.
Look at "The Time Machine". The original left you wondering "You know, if I was going to rebuild civilization, what three books would you take?" I remember having discussions with people over this issue, the sheer philosophy and rational behind such a decision.
The modern version? You wondered how the hell those guys grew brains out of their spines, and how Weena learned English. Yeah. Lots of thought put in there.
The store in question is not the "Apple Music Store" - it's the "iTunes Music Store". It would appear that, under the terms of the agreement, Apple has done everything it could to avoid using the Apple logo - save for the part in the store where it says "Copyright Apple Computer, Inc" - which is more than enough to establish it being different from "Apple Records".
As far as the previous posts about Apple Computer buying out Apple Record - why the hell not? It would ensure that the Beatles music would only be available via the iTMS - not that I am stating this is a "good" or "bad" thing (bad, if they stop selling CD's, good otherwise), and would truly cement Apple into the music business, while removing a pain in the ass.
Actually, this would be kind of interesting. I've read the original series (my father named one of my sisters after Dejah Therece, the Princess of Mars) and loved the sheer retro campty style of the "smiling Virginian" sword fighting his way across the Red Planet.
If done "so seriously it's fun" like Sky Captain appears, it could be one hell of a ride. If nothing else, I love a good swashbuckling movie.
I was talking to the CIO of a major health organization who had commissioned his engineers to find a solution to the problem of people bringing in their USB flash drives. Since he's worried about patient privacy, there's the fear that somebody would be inside, stick in a USB drive, copy data and walk out.
I know - "but what if they use a notepad, dummy". Yes, there is that problem - but last time I checked, you can steal a ton more data via a USB drive than a piece of paper.
The engineers answer? Epoxy glue in the USB slots. Not the best choice.
So for places that have to deal with security, this is good for two reasons. First, it prevents people from taking data through alternate methods (USB/Firewire drives). Second, it lets people with those devices bring them into the lab.
Take the iPod example. If you're working in one of my secure labs, I might tell you "sorry - leave it outside". But with this technology, I can say "Sure - bring it in and listen to your tunes" with a reasonable level of surety that they're not to go copy data they shouldn't.
So from my mind, this is a Good Thing, and I'd like to see it on my OS X/Linux machines as well.
Apple should probably know by now that the iPod has a lot of "value added" potential, outside of the music player.
It functions exceptionally as an MP3/AAC/AIFF/Audible player - no dispute about that. It works well as an audio recorder from what I've heard. And it also functions "decently" as a calendar/address book/note taker.
Apple might be seeing something beyond a "video iPod". Personally, based on what Mr. Jobs has said, I'd be surprised if it went that route. Most people I know don't care to be watching video as they walk/exercise/work/drive.
But what if the iPod became more of a hub? Take the current Airport Express device - 802.11 device plus audio player and print server. What if your iPod could wirelessly transmit audio to it, so you wouldn't need another computer on all the time - just pick up the iPod, and it would be like a little remote. Or you enter the room with your iPod, and the Airport Express starts playing what's on there, so you have seamless music from your earphones to your speakers.
Imagine if that could be done with video as well - just take the videos you made with iMovie or one of Apple's major movie editors, and plunk it onto the iPod. Now you can go to the other room and demo the movie on the TV set.
Remember how The Lord of the Rings was downloaded onto iPods and transferred to the editing room? Imagine a digital video camera that, instead of a small tape, just plugged in an iPod - direct from video to hard drive, and then just plug it into the computer and edit away. Or, if you have a digital camera, same thing - and now you can wirelessly transmit those photos to your computer for editing/emailing and the like.
So rather than a "video iPod", I wonder if Apple won't make the iPod an extension of the "digital hub" idea. Of course, knowing Apple, those features will work best with a Mac - but if they get other companies like HP to jump on the bandwagon and support these functions with their devices and software, Apple won't care - they'll still be selling iPods and cashing in the checks at the bank.
Of course, just an idea. I could be wrong.
Then he should apply at my job. We're an employee owned company with one of the tightest ethical boards I've ever seen - because we know if we get one shred of indecent rumor about us, we're out of business.
There are companies who's bottom line is affected by honest - and we'll hire the snitches any day of the week as proof.
Groaners all, and since everybody wants one, let's get them on the floor:
Now, "I have a bone" to pick with you has a whole new meaning!
Hey, is that a jawbone growing out of your shoulder or are you just happy to see me?
Great - I hear Johnson grew another mouth. Now I'll be getting it in both ears.
I, for one, welcome our shoulder jawbone overlords.
OK, now in seriousness, I think this is a great achievement. Flash forward 10-12 years, and imagine what this could do for other organs. Regrow a finger or a hand for amputees maybe? Suppose we get to work on other organs, such as the heart? Old guy in his 60's can just have new organs regrown to extend his healthy life expectancy to 150 years?
Of course, there's the whole "stem cell and cloning" issues that might come to play when we're talking about organs and not bones, but still, this is a very exciting first step. Congrats to the doctor and patient.
My wife went through something like this. At the time, we were just dating, but the situation was the same. She had seen some "accounting irregularities", contacted the FBI and discovered her boss was into all sorts of illegal crap. So she brought in the papers to them over the course of several months.
She wound up getting another job not too long after, and we didn't have to go into something weird like witness protection or some such. But it was a little freaky, and it's probably the reason why I wound up marrying her: I knew that she'd do the right thing no matter what. If nothing else, she would keep me honest.
My apologies - I was highlighting how some people will avoid any kind of technology that increases efficiency because of assumed privacy concerns. There are real issues out there, to be certain.
On the other hand, I've experienced a lot more fear at simple things, like credit cards. Working in retail as a young man, I had plenty of people telling me they were "tools of Satan to bring us under a one world government". No kidding.
Yeah, I'm worried when I hear that companies want your movements tracked just to rent a car, or companies that want my DNA. On the other hand, a national ID doesn't bother me, since it's just like my social security card (just with my picture on it).
So there's a balance, and I was addressing those who go way to the other spectrum of "paranoid fear" rather than "healthy suspicion".
I must say, I like a lot of the ideas - even if I think that many of them (such as the car driving itself) is about 10 years too early on his time table. Not because we technologically can't do it - but because of the politics.
;) ).
Take the urine testing/saliva testing devices. Personally, I wouldn't sweat over it. Car driving itself? Sure - go for it!
But there are those who will fear their loss of privacy (you can track where I go on the road through all the sensors! The Bible says that the Anti-Christ will put computer chips on our foreheads - cars are the first step!).
I love the wake-up system. I believe I read about something like that in Scientific American once - a column about a gentleman who created a hack that would open his blinds a little at a time based on the alarm clock, so that when he was suppose to be awake, he was being his full on the face with sunlight, a little at a time. Then he modified it to just lights, so you didn't need the blinds. But brain wave monitoring? Personally, that's fine with me, as long as my wife doesn't discover my secret dream involving her, Utena and Selfie Tilmitt in a hot tub full of green lime jello.
But a lot of people will balk at some things for reasons of fear. I still like a lot of the ideas, and who knows - a good chunk of them might come true. I personally hope the concepts of "data analyses and understanding over memorization" comes true. I get so frustrated when I hear the words "No open book tests". Last time I checked, my boss didn't tell me to make a program, then told me he'd fire me if I opened a book or looked up the data I needed through the newsgroups. Why? Because he knows that my ability to think through the data and see what's been done before is the reason he hired me, not to be able to rattle off information that might or might not apply at this second.
I mean, that's what we have MCSE's for. (And yes, I'm one of those too
Sorry, I was trying to imagine a "period in the future" where such items are commodotized, and a possibility that Apple might go towards. Naturally, in your wisdom I'm sure you can see that since nobody "knows" the future, this is all guesswork on our part.
My apologies if you believed that I was actually making "real" (no pun intended) predictions of the future, rather than just a "what if" exercise to explain to the parent poster why Apple wouldn't want people to play in the Fairplay arena.
Again, I was just bringing up possibilities, not actual facts of the future. Please unknot the panties, remember that a lot of this discussion boils down to navel gazing, and have a nice yummy hot chocolate. It will put things in perspective.
Because it's not just about the iPods.
Look at today. For the DRM crowd (so we can throw out MP3 and Ogg files), there are 3 systems in competition:
Microsoft WMA (in the most stores, about 25% of the market)
Sony (in one store, let's give them 5%)
Apple Fairplay (70% of the market)
Where's Real in this? I'm not even going to give them that much credit - this is about why Apple doesn't want others playing in its Fairplay system.
Right now, who's making money?
Napster - losing money on selling music
Sony - supplemented by hardware sales
Apple - maybe they make money off of iTMS, but they make money from selling iPods
Microsoft - licensing fees every time somebody buys a WMA song
Recently, some companies who sell "Pirate proof" CD's have announced they're dropping WMA and going with something "iPod compatible". Why? Because 70% of the DRM market is in the hands of the iPod.
Now, you're response is right: if more people used Fairplay, or some hacked version, then Apple would sell more iPods, and they'd make more money.
You're right - as of the year 2004.
Now, let's jump in the magic time machine and head to 2014. Now, here's a possible look at the market:
DRM music files: WMA (5%), Sony (5%), Apple 95%. Real - somewhere between 0-1%.
iPods cost $99 for a 100G hard drive - enough to store so much music its silly. Even adding in PDA and visual abilities, it's still so much storage Apple makes hardly anything selling iPods.
But! They make millions a year because everybody uses their DRM system, and everybody has to license with Apple to play it.
Imagine Steve Jobs sitting in the Jobs Cave thinking "What if by 2010, Microsoft has to pay Apple every time they sell a Windows computer, because they need the Fairplay codec? That could mean millions of dollars a year "just because".
That is why they don't want others selling songs: why bother? If they can get Real to kick the bucket so that all in the world is either WMA or Fairplay (and the former only supported via monopoly money - no, not the Parker Brothers kind), then Apple will rule the future of online music, and put them in a position to make a lot of money in the future.
Don't just look at "hardware sales now". I think Steve learned his lesson from a long time ago (which is "hardware sales aren't always king"), and he's looking at the long term. Odds are, he'll release Fairplay to others (*cough*HP and Motoroloa*cough*) when he's ready to, and get people to join his vision.
Is he right or wrong? I don't worry. Last time I checked, my iPod still works great with music CD's I buy in the store. But at least now you know.
And knowing is half the battle.
That's understandable - that's an easy way to get mouth sores.
You'll have to wait a year until our new baby boy is done with them first....
Millions of people wouldn't have known what Janet Jackson's left breast looked like.
I only know because I was out of the room during the halftime show, missed it, had no idea what occured, then within hours had various friends of mine with PVR's sending me the files via email.
And all I could think as I looked at them was "Eh - my wife's are better. And probably more real."
Is when we all have computers embedded in our skin, and they start placing spam in our foods to transmit messages to us.
No, not Spam. The other kind. Then again, you have to wonder just what a virus would do to this information transmitting proteins. No, not that kind of virus, the other kind.
No, I don't know which kind either. I just confused myself.
How else will they know if their schoolchildren are being attacked by this month's Tentacle Monster?
[sarcasm]Secunia tells us that OS X, OpenBSD, and Linux are a cracker's dream compared to Windows! They have the statistics to prove it![/sarcasm]
I'm surprised some other intelligent company hasn't done this, a la Apple. Take the best of the base, make the GUI idiot proof and possibly proprietary (so no more "KDE is better, Gnome is better), and you've got almost instant money if you put in an X11 plug (so all those yummy Gimp, etc programs work) so you've got instant application list.
It would take about 3-4 years to develop right (again, see the OS X model), but you could rule the roost if you did it right.
I wonder if this is an example of Microsoft trying to be the "end all, be all" of everything, and it's finally catching up with them.
So far, they have 4 sources of real revenue:
Windows OS/Server
Office
Development Tool Sales
Some hardware (mice, keyboards, etc)
Everything else that MS is involved in has been money losing ventures. Cell phones, PDA, cable TV, "Ultimate TV" - heck, the "raging successful Xbox" has lost over $2 billion for the company (and if that's success, I'd hate to see what failure is).
MS has $56 billion in the bank (some cash, some investments), and so far, revenues are still outstripping costs. But I think Ballmer can look ahead and read the writing on the wall. Other than the MS tax on computers (yes, it exists, deal with it), people aren't rushing out to upgrade with every new OS release. Lots of folks are still on Windows 98/2000 Server and Office 95.
So what will be cut away? WIll they just reduce the number of employees? Shift more developers to India? Or cut on some projects and say "OK, so we're not going to take over the cable market."
The Xbox2, for example, is being retooled not to be "successful" (as in "Beat Sony!"), but "profitable", which should be their focus: making a game system that is cheaper to produce, harder to hack, and even if they aren't #1 in the game industry they can make money at it (wait - that sounds like another console company out there). Why be #1 in the home media player market when sometimes being #2 makes money too?
Odds are, MS is, as the article mentions, just going through a "mid-life crisis". They'll either recoup, tighten down, and keep chugging along - or just proceed with "business as usual" for all their talk, then wonder 5 years from now why all of the business are running Slinux (simple Linux - easy enough for Grandma to figure out how to change the screen resolution) or Apple OS X instead of Windows.