The solution is pay-per-mail. I set my price at $1 per email. The charge is forgiven if I reply. You spam me at your expense - I'll happily accept the $100 per day.
Can anyone explain the discontinuities in the FreeBSD plots? Intuitively I would guess that something is breaking at high load, rather than getting miraculously faster. The author suggests that a clever optimization is kicking in, but I wonder if his tests were actually ensuring that the calls succeed.
Also watch out as you read the graphs - just to keep you on your toes, he changes the colors in every one!
The fact that the compression format is a standard does absolutly nothing to help you play ITMS files on non-apple hardware. These files are ENCRYPTED and will not play except on an iPod or a Macintosh for which they are licensed. The only way to play them elsewhere is to first convert to AIFF and then possibly re-encode (even if you want AAC, heaven forfend!).
This is not even about DRM (notwithstanding Apple's reassuring words to the RIAA). The DRM is actually extremely weak, as any DRM is. It's all about vendor lock-in, in that you can't get at the original compressed data except on Apple hardware.
What I want to know is: was the sound airy or spatial? Did it have good low-end punch? Were the transients detailed? Was the midrange sweet or soft? Were the highs clean, or were they just crisp?
A company called Unicomp bought the rights to the original design. They are still available, steel backplate, buckling springs, sensible layout, and all. get 'em here, $50 a pop.
I bought four, one for each machine I use at work (including a Mac - used a USB-PS2 converter) and one for my PC at home. They absolutely kick ass. I saw many of the original IBM keyboards at the Vintage Conputer Festival last weekend - tested the feel and weight of them and the original ones are identical to the current ones from Unicomp as far as I can tell.
You might just be perpetrating a clever troll, or you might just be misinformed. Sorry in advance if I spoiled any trolling
John, while my comments may have been a bit inaccurate with respect to stamping processes, I'm pretty sure that they accurate describe hard vs soft tools for injection molding.
I'm sure it'll do just as well as portable DVD players. Who are they kidding comparing something like that to an iPod?
I've always thought of video and audio as two completely different classes of product. Sure, the people who buy one buy the other, but CE companies always seem to ignore the fact that we actually use music completely differently from audio. The technology may be similar, but to assume that adding video to an ipod will make a better product just because it does more is quite ridiculous.
A friend of mine is an industrial designer who works with lots of plastic shops in the far east. He said that every molding shop has had at least one incident of somebody losing an appendage... in fact, the larger machines which make plastic car bumpers and such have been known to liquefy an entire person who happened to be standing inside working on the tool.
So let me get this straight.. hard tooling is better and costs less, soft tooling is worse and costs more?
Spend more on hard tooling, and you get a lower cost per part. Very simple.
Soft tooling is made from less expensive, less durable metals such as soft steel or even aluminum. It can be used to make a few hundred or perhaps a couple thousand parts for prototyping or a small production run. They are cheaper to make not only because the metal is cheaper, but also because the metal is easier to work, so it takes less effor to make the tool. The reason you see better cuts with the hard tool is because the edges are stronger, and the reason you see a better finish is because the tooling can withstand much higher pressure.
It's also helpful to do a soft tool first because not only are you prototyping the design, you also need to prototype the tool itself. Re-working a soft tool to make it work better or to change design features is relatively easy.
Actually any program that uses QuickTime for MPEG reading can read them if you are logged in to the computer.
Well, yes and no. You can get PCM data, but not the original AAC. Quicktime does not allow an application to extract the original ISO-compliant bitstream, and this is what currently prevents not only file sharing of m4p files, but also the playback of said files on non-Apple products. The only way is to re-encode.
There is no such thing as a standard AAC file. AAC (Advanced Audio Coding) is a codec, not a file format.
Right.
The AAC files created by iTunes are actually.m4a files and the files that come from the iTunes Music Store are.m4p files.
Right
Basically the m4a and m4p files are Quicktime files that use AAC encoding to store music.
Actually m4a files are just MPEG bitsreams presented as a file - they're not a special format. You can extract the AAC component using a tool such as mp4UI (which is based on the MPEG4IP tools).
The m4a data is unencrypted and the m4p data is encrypted.
Yes. And I don't think there is a published spec for the file format OR the encryption. I'm sure it won't be long before someone finds a workaround to extract the original AAC bitstream by leveraging Apple's own software (peeking at memory).
Other players could definitely play the m4a files if they worked out the file format. Knowing Apple the file format is probably readily available to developers.
Yes... well, actually there's nothing to work out. Just grab MPEG4IP and you can extract them yourself.
The m4p files, by nature of the encryption, would require either cracking the encryption or partnering with Apple in order to play on a 3rd party music player.
I have no doubt that the first will happen if/when ITMS becomes very popular (in spite of the second probably not happening any time soon).
No, that is absolutely 100% wrong!!! Files *created* by iTunes when you rip your CDs are standard AAC files. However, files downloaded from the music store are NOT standard AAC files, and the DRM is most definitely NOT "volutarily enforced" by itunes. They are encrypted and keyed to the computer which you license with Apple.
MPEG 4 is an ISO standard. If other player manufacturers don't want to use standard formats and instead use WMA, that's not Apple's fault.
Apparently you've never wanted to play your music on any non-apple product without first expanding your files to 12x their original size, and then possibly having to re-compress them to another format.
I also imagine you've never had to deal with losing a hard disk full of all those precious songs and having to redownload and re-license them for your new machine because you can't just copy them over.
Certainly though, you've drunk Apple's cool-aid with respect to AAC having acceptable sound quality, despite strong evidence that it's only *marginally* better than MP3 at low bit rates (which ITMS files are).
But that's okay, you keep racking up those charges on your credit card, while the rest of us will continue our boycott of the RIAA until they begin distributing a good product for a fair price.
Slashdot Mirror
The solution is pay-per-mail. I set my price at $1 per email. The charge is forgiven if I reply. You spam me at your expense - I'll happily accept the $100 per day.
...as long as nobody's looking!
Can anyone explain the discontinuities in the FreeBSD plots? Intuitively I would guess that something is breaking at high load, rather than getting miraculously faster. The author suggests that a clever optimization is kicking in, but I wonder if his tests were actually ensuring that the calls succeed.
Also watch out as you read the graphs - just to keep you on your toes, he changes the colors in every one!
Duh... well you can also play it on a Windows machine now using Apple's software. Not on a competeing hardware player is what I meant.
The fact that the compression format is a standard does absolutly nothing to help you play ITMS files on non-apple hardware. These files are ENCRYPTED and will not play except on an iPod or a Macintosh for which they are licensed. The only way to play them elsewhere is to first convert to AIFF and then possibly re-encode (even if you want AAC, heaven forfend!).
This is not even about DRM (notwithstanding Apple's reassuring words to the RIAA). The DRM is actually extremely weak, as any DRM is. It's all about vendor lock-in, in that you can't get at the original compressed data except on Apple hardware.
what are the costs to the computer owners?
$4.23
Next question?
...I get laid on a regular basis. Karma isn't really high on my list of priorities.
I'm a little confused... once "Job 1" is taken care of, what priorities could there possibly be?
I was gonna post this exact same comment
HA! And you think you can recover that "stolen" karma just by rephrasing and elaborating on his post?
You must be n... er.. an experienced slashdotter.
What I want to know is: was the sound airy or spatial? Did it have good low-end punch? Were the transients detailed? Was the midrange sweet or soft? Were the highs clean, or were they just crisp?
A company called Unicomp bought the rights to the original design. They are still available, steel backplate, buckling springs, sensible layout, and all. get 'em here, $50 a pop.
I bought four, one for each machine I use at work (including a Mac - used a USB-PS2 converter) and one for my PC at home. They absolutely kick ass. I saw many of the original IBM keyboards at the Vintage Conputer Festival last weekend - tested the feel and weight of them and the original ones are identical to the current ones from Unicomp as far as I can tell.
You might just be perpetrating a clever troll, or you might just be misinformed. Sorry in advance if I spoiled any trolling
John, while my comments may have been a bit inaccurate with respect to stamping processes, I'm pretty sure that they accurate describe hard vs soft tools for injection molding.
er woops, I meant to say "music differently from video". heh. Better slow down on that submit button.
I'm sure it'll do just as well as portable DVD players. Who are they kidding comparing something like that to an iPod?
I've always thought of video and audio as two completely different classes of product. Sure, the people who buy one buy the other, but CE companies always seem to ignore the fact that we actually use music completely differently from audio. The technology may be similar, but to assume that adding video to an ipod will make a better product just because it does more is quite ridiculous.
I didn't have a lot of time to stay and see the museum - will go back another day I guess. Here are some photos I took at the afternoon exhibit.
A friend of mine is an industrial designer who works with lots of plastic shops in the far east. He said that every molding shop has had at least one incident of somebody losing an appendage... in fact, the larger machines which make plastic car bumpers and such have been known to liquefy an entire person who happened to be standing inside working on the tool.
So let me get this straight.. hard tooling is better and costs less, soft tooling is worse and costs more?
Spend more on hard tooling, and you get a lower cost per part. Very simple.
Soft tooling is made from less expensive, less durable metals such as soft steel or even aluminum. It can be used to make a few hundred or perhaps a couple thousand parts for prototyping or a small production run. They are cheaper to make not only because the metal is cheaper, but also because the metal is easier to work, so it takes less effor to make the tool. The reason you see better cuts with the hard tool is because the edges are stronger, and the reason you see a better finish is because the tooling can withstand much higher pressure.
It's also helpful to do a soft tool first because not only are you prototyping the design, you also need to prototype the tool itself. Re-working a soft tool to make it work better or to change design features is relatively easy.
This is so nutty its unbelievable.
That's not coffee!!!
Actually any program that uses QuickTime for MPEG reading can read them if you are logged in to the computer.
Well, yes and no. You can get PCM data, but not the original AAC. Quicktime does not allow an application to extract the original ISO-compliant bitstream, and this is what currently prevents not only file sharing of m4p files, but also the playback of said files on non-Apple products. The only way is to re-encode.
Obviously it is "volutarily enforced" by iTunes, as iTunes could just as easily authenticate any DRM AAC file it encounters.
Where are you getting this information? The files are E N C R Y P T E D S P E C I F I C A L L Y F O R E A C H C L I E N T.
I don't know about the parent poster, but I learned it from the Moving Pictures Expert Group (ie. MPEG)
Please tell me where in that document it describes the DRM that apple is using and how anyone can decode the files.
There is no such thing as a standard AAC file. AAC (Advanced Audio Coding) is a codec, not a file format.
.m4a files and the files that come from the iTunes Music Store are .m4p files.
Right.
The AAC files created by iTunes are actually
Right
Basically the m4a and m4p files are Quicktime files that use AAC encoding to store music.
Actually m4a files are just MPEG bitsreams presented as a file - they're not a special format. You can extract the AAC component using a tool such as mp4UI (which is based on the MPEG4IP tools).
The m4a data is unencrypted and the m4p data is encrypted.
Yes. And I don't think there is a published spec for the file format OR the encryption. I'm sure it won't be long before someone finds a workaround to extract the original AAC bitstream by leveraging Apple's own software (peeking at memory).
Other players could definitely play the m4a files if they worked out the file format. Knowing Apple the file format is probably readily available to developers.
Yes... well, actually there's nothing to work out. Just grab MPEG4IP and you can extract them yourself.
The m4p files, by nature of the encryption, would require either cracking the encryption or partnering with Apple in order to play on a 3rd party music player.
I have no doubt that the first will happen if/when ITMS becomes very popular (in spite of the second probably not happening any time soon).
No, that is absolutely 100% wrong!!! Files *created* by iTunes when you rip your CDs are standard AAC files. However, files downloaded from the music store are NOT standard AAC files, and the DRM is most definitely NOT "volutarily enforced" by itunes. They are encrypted and keyed to the computer which you license with Apple.
MPEG 4 is an ISO standard. If other player manufacturers don't want to use standard formats and instead use WMA, that's not Apple's fault.
What a load of B.S. - who told you that?
Maybe I'm missing something?
Apparently you've never wanted to play your music on any non-apple product without first expanding your files to 12x their original size, and then possibly having to re-compress them to another format.
I also imagine you've never had to deal with losing a hard disk full of all those precious songs and having to redownload and re-license them for your new machine because you can't just copy them over.
Certainly though, you've drunk Apple's cool-aid with respect to AAC having acceptable sound quality, despite strong evidence that it's only *marginally* better than MP3 at low bit rates (which ITMS files are).
But that's okay, you keep racking up those charges on your credit card, while the rest of us will continue our boycott of the RIAA until they begin distributing a good product for a fair price.
Why do people seem to tolerate DRM and crippled formats when Apple's peddling them?
Hehe... try this one next time. Nearly two billion hits and.. er.. counting!