Instant quality loss, as well - unless you save in a lossless format - in which case you are using an order of magnitude more storage space to store your recording of the original file, which was lossily compressed to begin with.
Because EMI wants more money to make up for the file sharing that will occur - and Apple wants more money to pay for the doubled file size (the non-DRM songs will be 256 kbps AAC vs. 128 kbps for all other songs on iTunes).
Sorry, no one has better application management than the Mac. Every application is a single file, that you can drag anywhere on your system, and double-click to run. To delete it, you drag it to the trash.
How can you get any better than that?
Some badly-written applications require installers, but they are few and far between.
The Linux package management systems are merely tolerable, especially if you have any problems.
That's wonderful. Now consider the cost of your time in building the computer, installing Windows, downloading and installing all the drivers from the various manufacturers, and all that.
Never mind the fact that some of the components you ordered are OEM, meaning they have no warranty - and that even for the components that have a warranty, you will likely have to deal with dueling technical support departments. Random crashes while playing games? Video card manufacturer says its your motherboard, motherboard manufacturer says its your video card. Have fun with that.
The rest of us will pay the extra $27, spend ten minutes unpacked our fully-assembled, fully-warranted (from a single source) computers, and get on with our lives.
"Once all the "fat client" applications migrate fully online, it won't matter what the user interface on the desktop is like"
And when is this going to happen? The web is a terrible platform for application development. HTML is a joke, Javascript is a joke, Ajax is a joke. Every time I am forced to dabble in web development, I am amazed that people keep talking about web-based operating systems, where the browser is the only software you need to run locally.
Developing an application for the web means you are trying to using a poorly-specified, poorly-implemented document-formatting system with some bolted-on scripting and ugly hacks (like Ajax) to write your software. It is slow, tedious, incompatible, error-prone, and completely devoid of anything resembling good software engineering. I can't imagine how much pain Google went through to write their little online office apps. The HTML-based web will never replace a desktop operating system - mark my words. If it does, it will us back ten years relative to what could be achieved on the desktop.
A few months ago, I switched to Firefox because I was convinced Safari was slowing down my system. Just this morning, I fired up Safari again - and it is at least three times as fast as Firefox. Don't know what I was thinking...
Steve Jobs has publicly stated that the DRM is there only because the record industry demands it, and that if the record industry would allow DRM-free music sales, Apple would remove the DRM from the iTunes Store.
There's an even better solution to this problem - charge people who buy unclean energy for the pollution it causes. That's the real reason people are trying to force CFLs on us - why not just attack the problem at the root?
Let me say this again - it doesn't matter that your phones could technically do everything the iPhone can. The point is that the iPhone will make it simple, straightforward and easy.
It's like you're saying that all cars are the same because they can all get you to your destination, will keep you hot or cold, and will let you play the radio. Never mind how fast they accelerate, what the fuel mileage is, how well the AC works, how good the speaker system is, how reliable it is. A Kia Rio and a BMW 335i _technically_ have many of the same features - why would anyone buy the BMW?
Another hint: most people know how to connect their phone to their PC. It's called mini USB. Know how I know they know how to do this? It's the same method as an iPod.
Yes, and how do you transfer files to it? Either you drag files manually into weirdly laid-out folders, or you have to use some kind of flaky, slow, ugly application the manufacturer had some moron throw together, with bitmapped graphics all over the place.
I understood his point just fine - my point was the usability (as opposed to intuitiveness) benefits of placing the menubar at the top of the screen make up for the slight chance of confusing new users.
OS X makes his point a little less valid as well, since every application's name appears as the first item in the menubar.
"You also seem to have left out Windows Mobile in your list of companies that you seem to think don't know how to make a user interface. People can hate Windows concepts and MS, sure, but MS spends a lot of money with real people to ensure their crap is easy to use."
That's why Vista's UI is so great, right? I've seen it on several machines now, and it's a freaking mess.
"It is people like you that forget the rest of us have been using Windows Mobile and even Motorola 'user interfaces' on our phones for SEVERAL years, playing our music, using our bluetooth, playing our movies, and also accessing the internet at near DSL speeds, with the latter being something the iPhone can't even do."
Did you completely miss my point? I realize that these things are all technically possible on Windows Mobile and Motorola devices - the point is that the interfaces are lousy. I guess it's a matter of opinion - but I know a lot of people share mine.
"If Apple is the God of user interfaces, then why do they continue to copy good ideas and try to promote them as their own, you know like the iPod?" Again, you're missing the point. What did the iPod copy, other than the idea of an MP3 player? The iPod was a success because of the user interface, and solid design that felt good in your hand. People like to whine about the marketing and 'cool' factor, but the iPod was popular long before the ads, and long before it became a fashion accessory, because of how good the UI was.
" If Apple is the God of user interfaces and that is what you see as them doing well, why don't they actually create a new user interface paradigm, yet the new concepts for UI come from the OSS world and even MS. Remember this the next time you drag and drop text in a document, MS did it first." So, that's the best Microsoft UI innovation you could think of?
And you don't think that the iPhone represents a new user-interface paradigm, with the multi-touch screen and all?
"Take the Menu bar, and how many users just don't get the 'multi-application' usage concept because the flipping bar confuses them, so they close and flip between applications." Ever heard of Fitt's Law? There's a very good reason for putting the menu bar at the top of the screen - it makes it much easier to 'hit' the menus with your mouse, because the mouse stops at the top of the screen. Compare this to windows, where you have to hit a target of about 20 pixels or so to select a menu. I suppose it might not be completely intuitive, but in the long term it is a much better solution.
"If you are a CS major at MIT, then my faith in the next generation has been destroyed." I'm crushed.
Have you ever heard of something called a 'user interface'? Apple knows how to build a good one, and Motorola, LG, Nokia, and the rest of them do not.
That is what will sell the iPhone. For every geek who looks at the iPhone and says "Bah! My free-as-in-speech, open-source, ugly orange phone with the stupid name (OpenMoko) will do all that and more! The iPhone is crap!", there will be 100 normal users who try it out and say "Goddamn, this phone is so much easier to use than the POS I have now. I'm buying one."
I am by no means technically illiterate - I'm a computer science major at MIT. But I have long since lost my patience for fighting with badly-designed, badly-engineered, badly-implemented consumer electronics. I will be buying an iPhone when it comes out, because like all of Apple's recent products, it will 'Just Work'.
It will be a hybrid iPod/cell phone/PDA with no sacrifices in functionality, compared to carrying around three separate devices. As Jobs mentioned in his keynote, the price is still cheaper than buying a smartphone and iPod Nano separately.
It's not a problem with all VPNs, just a specific brand of VPN client (Nortel Contivity), that is known to be flaky on gear from a number of manufacturers, not just Apple.
I thought this was some kind of cool new perspective-based algorithm or something, but it turns out you have to be able to get close enough to the object to stick a label of known dimensions on it. The software justs compares the size of the label with the size of the object you're measuring. I'm not paying $99 for that.
There are already a number of laser rangefinders with compasses built-in that can do the same thing using simple trig.
And what do you think would have happened if these things had been bombs, disguised as creepy little advertisements, and the police ignored them? Never mind the damage and loss of life, people would be bitching to high heaven about police and government incompetence.
The bottom line is, in times like these and in a major city like Boston, you have to take everything seriously.
Look at the pictures posted of one of these things - they have a row of D-batteries covered in duct tape. It looks very much like a bomb with a stupid figurine on them. And these things were found in somewhat suspicious locations - on the side of a bridge's concrete support columns, for instance. It's reasonable to expect the police react with suspicion after seeing a strange, jury-rigged little electronic device under a bridge.
People like me? I have just as much of a problem with the invasions of privacy I mentioned as you (apparently) do.
What I will never understand is why most people who are against those invasions of privacy have no problem with the government interfering with their lives in other ways - for instance, by outlawing a specific kind of lightbulb. They're both restrictions placed on your freedom.
Democrats like to say "Keep out of my bedroom!" and "Let me do what I want with my body!", but it seems that they are perfectly okay with saying "Come into my living room and tell me what kind of lightbulb I can put in this lamp!"
To me, restrictions on gay marriage and abortion are the same thing as restrictions on lightbulb purchases.
Tell me, how is restricting the temperature of your house any more of an invasion of privacy than a warrantless wiretap?
What do incandescent lights have to do with destroying the environment?
It's an indirect connection: incandescent lights are bad for the environment because they're inefficient, and the extra power it takes to drive them is often generated through unclean means.
But if what you're really worried about are the environmental effects of power generation, just tax the consumption and/or generation of unclean power.
Fluorescent bulbs are actually directly bad for the environment - they contain mercury, and no one is going to remember to dispose of them properly.
The use of whale oil was also directly bad for the environment - or the whales, at least.
But there is nothing directly bad about incandescent bulbs. That's why it's stupid to outlaw them.
Slashdot Mirror
Instant quality loss, as well - unless you save in a lossless format - in which case you are using an order of magnitude more storage space to store your recording of the original file, which was lossily compressed to begin with.
AAC is a free format, just like Ogg Vorbis.
Because EMI wants more money to make up for the file sharing that will occur - and Apple wants more money to pay for the doubled file size (the non-DRM songs will be 256 kbps AAC vs. 128 kbps for all other songs on iTunes).
You only have to pay the $0.30 difference in price between the DRM and non-DRM versions - you don't have to pay for the whole song again.
The DRM-free files are twice the quality of the DRM-laden ones - that may account for some or all of the $0.30 increase.
Sorry, no one has better application management than the Mac. Every application is a single file, that you can drag anywhere on your system, and double-click to run. To delete it, you drag it to the trash.
How can you get any better than that?
Some badly-written applications require installers, but they are few and far between.
The Linux package management systems are merely tolerable, especially if you have any problems.
That's wonderful. Now consider the cost of your time in building the computer, installing Windows, downloading and installing all the drivers from the various manufacturers, and all that.
Never mind the fact that some of the components you ordered are OEM, meaning they have no warranty - and that even for the components that have a warranty, you will likely have to deal with dueling technical support departments. Random crashes while playing games? Video card manufacturer says its your motherboard, motherboard manufacturer says its your video card. Have fun with that.
The rest of us will pay the extra $27, spend ten minutes unpacked our fully-assembled, fully-warranted (from a single source) computers, and get on with our lives.
"Once all the "fat client" applications migrate fully online, it won't matter what the user interface on the desktop is like"
And when is this going to happen? The web is a terrible platform for application development. HTML is a joke, Javascript is a joke, Ajax is a joke. Every time I am forced to dabble in web development, I am amazed that people keep talking about web-based operating systems, where the browser is the only software you need to run locally.
Developing an application for the web means you are trying to using a poorly-specified, poorly-implemented document-formatting system with some bolted-on scripting and ugly hacks (like Ajax) to write your software. It is slow, tedious, incompatible, error-prone, and completely devoid of anything resembling good software engineering. I can't imagine how much pain Google went through to write their little online office apps. The HTML-based web will never replace a desktop operating system - mark my words. If it does, it will us back ten years relative to what could be achieved on the desktop.
A few months ago, I switched to Firefox because I was convinced Safari was slowing down my system. Just this morning, I fired up Safari again - and it is at least three times as fast as Firefox. Don't know what I was thinking...
Steve Jobs has publicly stated that the DRM is there only because the record industry demands it, and that if the record industry would allow DRM-free music sales, Apple would remove the DRM from the iTunes Store.
There's an even better solution to this problem - charge people who buy unclean energy for the pollution it causes. That's the real reason people are trying to force CFLs on us - why not just attack the problem at the root?
Let me say this again - it doesn't matter that your phones could technically do everything the iPhone can. The point is that the iPhone will make it simple, straightforward and easy.
It's like you're saying that all cars are the same because they can all get you to your destination, will keep you hot or cold, and will let you play the radio. Never mind how fast they accelerate, what the fuel mileage is, how well the AC works, how good the speaker system is, how reliable it is. A Kia Rio and a BMW 335i _technically_ have many of the same features - why would anyone buy the BMW?
Another hint: most people know how to connect their phone to their PC. It's called mini USB. Know how I know they know how to do this? It's the same method as an iPod.
Yes, and how do you transfer files to it? Either you drag files manually into weirdly laid-out folders, or you have to use some kind of flaky, slow, ugly application the manufacturer had some moron throw together, with bitmapped graphics all over the place.
I understood his point just fine - my point was the usability (as opposed to intuitiveness) benefits of placing the menubar at the top of the screen make up for the slight chance of confusing new users.
OS X makes his point a little less valid as well, since every application's name appears as the first item in the menubar.
"You also seem to have left out Windows Mobile in your list of companies that you seem to think don't know how to make a user interface. People can hate Windows concepts and MS, sure, but MS spends a lot of money with real people to ensure their crap is easy to use."
That's why Vista's UI is so great, right? I've seen it on several machines now, and it's a freaking mess.
"It is people like you that forget the rest of us have been using Windows Mobile and even Motorola 'user interfaces' on our phones for SEVERAL years, playing our music, using our bluetooth, playing our movies, and also accessing the internet at near DSL speeds, with the latter being something the iPhone can't even do."
Did you completely miss my point? I realize that these things are all technically possible on Windows Mobile and Motorola devices - the point is that the interfaces are lousy. I guess it's a matter of opinion - but I know a lot of people share mine.
"If Apple is the God of user interfaces, then why do they continue to copy good ideas and try to promote them as their own, you know like the iPod?"
Again, you're missing the point. What did the iPod copy, other than the idea of an MP3 player? The iPod was a success because of the user interface, and solid design that felt good in your hand. People like to whine about the marketing and 'cool' factor, but the iPod was popular long before the ads, and long before it became a fashion accessory, because of how good the UI was.
"
If Apple is the God of user interfaces and that is what you see as them doing well, why don't they actually create a new user interface paradigm, yet the new concepts for UI come from the OSS world and even MS. Remember this the next time you drag and drop text in a document, MS did it first."
So, that's the best Microsoft UI innovation you could think of?
And you don't think that the iPhone represents a new user-interface paradigm, with the multi-touch screen and all?
"Take the Menu bar, and how many users just don't get the 'multi-application' usage concept because the flipping bar confuses them, so they close and flip between applications."
Ever heard of Fitt's Law? There's a very good reason for putting the menu bar at the top of the screen - it makes it much easier to 'hit' the menus with your mouse, because the mouse stops at the top of the screen. Compare this to windows, where you have to hit a target of about 20 pixels or so to select a menu. I suppose it might not be completely intuitive, but in the long term it is a much better solution.
"If you are a CS major at MIT, then my faith in the next generation has been destroyed."
I'm crushed.
Have you ever heard of something called a 'user interface'? Apple knows how to build a good one, and Motorola, LG, Nokia, and the rest of them do not.
That is what will sell the iPhone. For every geek who looks at the iPhone and says "Bah! My free-as-in-speech, open-source, ugly orange phone with the stupid name (OpenMoko) will do all that and more! The iPhone is crap!", there will be 100 normal users who try it out and say "Goddamn, this phone is so much easier to use than the POS I have now. I'm buying one."
I am by no means technically illiterate - I'm a computer science major at MIT. But I have long since lost my patience for fighting with badly-designed, badly-engineered, badly-implemented consumer electronics. I will be buying an iPhone when it comes out, because like all of Apple's recent products, it will 'Just Work'.
It will be a hybrid iPod/cell phone/PDA with no sacrifices in functionality, compared to carrying around three separate devices. As Jobs mentioned in his keynote, the price is still cheaper than buying a smartphone and iPod Nano separately.
If the 'consumers' feel they're being screwed by the cell phone operators, they don't need to purchase their services.
When people complain about , I always wonder - why are you buying their products if you hate them so much?
Why should we have our screens cluttered up with "PDF ALERT! PDF ALERT!" because you can't figure out how to configure your system properly?
If you're too lazy or lacking in knowledge, buy a Mac - PDFs load instantly in OS X right out of the box.
It's not a problem with all VPNs, just a specific brand of VPN client (Nortel Contivity), that is known to be flaky on gear from a number of manufacturers, not just Apple.
Okay, a brand-new, just-released product has a bug. Why is this on Slashdot?
I thought this was some kind of cool new perspective-based algorithm or something, but it turns out you have to be able to get close enough to the object to stick a label of known dimensions on it. The software justs compares the size of the label with the size of the object you're measuring. I'm not paying $99 for that.
There are already a number of laser rangefinders with compasses built-in that can do the same thing using simple trig.
What does a closed API have to do with DRM?
And what do you think would have happened if these things had been bombs, disguised as creepy little advertisements, and the police ignored them? Never mind the damage and loss of life, people would be bitching to high heaven about police and government incompetence.
The bottom line is, in times like these and in a major city like Boston, you have to take everything seriously.
Look at the pictures posted of one of these things - they have a row of D-batteries covered in duct tape. It looks very much like a bomb with a stupid figurine on them. And these things were found in somewhat suspicious locations - on the side of a bridge's concrete support columns, for instance. It's reasonable to expect the police react with suspicion after seeing a strange, jury-rigged little electronic device under a bridge.
People like me? I have just as much of a problem with the invasions of privacy I mentioned as you (apparently) do.
What I will never understand is why most people who are against those invasions of privacy have no problem with the government interfering with their lives in other ways - for instance, by outlawing a specific kind of lightbulb. They're both restrictions placed on your freedom.
Democrats like to say "Keep out of my bedroom!" and "Let me do what I want with my body!", but it seems that they are perfectly okay with saying "Come into my living room and tell me what kind of lightbulb I can put in this lamp!"
To me, restrictions on gay marriage and abortion are the same thing as restrictions on lightbulb purchases.
Tell me, how is restricting the temperature of your house any more of an invasion of privacy than a warrantless wiretap?
What do incandescent lights have to do with destroying the environment?
It's an indirect connection: incandescent lights are bad for the environment because they're inefficient, and the extra power it takes to drive them is often generated through unclean means.
But if what you're really worried about are the environmental effects of power generation, just tax the consumption and/or generation of unclean power.
Fluorescent bulbs are actually directly bad for the environment - they contain mercury, and no one is going to remember to dispose of them properly.
The use of whale oil was also directly bad for the environment - or the whales, at least.
But there is nothing directly bad about incandescent bulbs. That's why it's stupid to outlaw them.