You know, it's about time somebody actually named a couple of people who would have bought one of the iPod killers if it hadn't been for those meddling iTunes store tunes.
Ahh, so you are one of those who wants Apple to pump up those losers who bet their money on PlaysForSure players to sell their tunes for them and failed despite having a headstart on both the availability of players and stores. Maybe they should have stuck to selling used cars?
Apple believes they sell superior hardware. Apple believes they sell superior software. If follows, if these things are true, and you ignore any mitigating factors, that Apple stands to make the most money by decoupling the sales of these things. So why don't you advocate not distributing the "best" kernel and the "best" GUI together? Down with all Linux distros.
If Apple can not figure out how to offer two different formats, then they have some seriously incompetent software engineers. I mean hell, they currently offer movie files and music files... has offering up two different types of files destroy the fabric of the universe over at Apple? Get off defending Apple. Apple likes DRM because DRM is good for Apple. No one is forcing Apple to DRM indie labels other then Apple. Why would Apple make it harder not only for themselves, but also for their users just so people who have already said they wouldn't buy from them complain a little less. Face it: you and the couple of others are insignificant to Apple
The low bitrate isn't the only thing that keeps me from buying songs from iTunes (unless I really can't find them elsewhere). If you make a spectrogram from songs from the iTunes store, you'll notice that they have no frequency content above 15.5kHz. That's slightly worse than FM broadcast quality. They probably lowpass filter the songs to keep the quality decent within the 128kbps bitrate, or maybe to keep some RIAA bosses happy too. Care to back that up?
lets say 5 iPods per person for the fun of it... you still are only talking on average 100 songs per iPod owner...which would mean close to 100$ sunk (or the time and quality cost by burning to CD-R and re-ripping to MP3) if you decide to get a sandisk or creative as your 6th player.
You are trying to prove that Apple is evil for not "opening" their DRM by pointing to the second-most successful online-music store that doesn't depend on Apple doing just that? Why are you insisting that Apple give welfare to companies that just can't cut it on their own?
In reality, you don't have hidden nuclear bombs and known terrorists who are conveniently in your jail cell and know where the nuclear bombs are hidden
Yeah, but what if you did? Let's say you've got some terrorist who killed your wife and daughter, and has planted a bomb that will kill millions of people. Time is ticking, and unless the police get the information they don't have time to search all the possible locations. You've got Carlos the terrorist handcuffed to a radiator, a pair of pliers and blowtorch. Oh, and Carlos starts goading you about how your wife and daughter pleaded for their lives. He is unarmed.
Good I can feel your hatred. Take up the pliers and the blowtorch and torture him with all your anger and your journey to the Dark Side will be complete.
This message was paid for by Fox News on behalf of the Committee to Elect Anyone But McCain. You forgot to mention that while any American who knows something is trained to withstand torture, but everybody else isn't (at least not the improved American torture, errrmm, interogation).
"FairPlay may make PlaysForSure-based products from Creative and other Microsoft aligned rivals slightly less appealing because they "won't work with iTunes," but since those players work fine with CDs and have stores of their own, the real reason nobody's buying them is not because of the DRM in the iTunes Store."
Are you kidding me? The whole reason that other music systems aren't as popular as ipod/Itunes combo is becuase of they dont have the simplicity of the ipods design and the songs they have on itunes form the store wont work on their player.
Oh, yeah, keep ignoring that PlaysForSure is older and already had several (lame) stores before the iTMS. There is very little content that you can buy on the iTMS but not on one of several PlaysForSure based stores.
The claim that people would rush out to buy non-iPods if only they could play music bought from the iT(M)S is nothing but dumb excuse for the lacking sales.
Perhaps I just don't think there's any point arguing with someone who describes me as a cocksucking riaa shill? Translation: you don't want to argue with someone who discovered your little secret.
Anything related to long-term habitation of man in space - or are you going to wait until you go to Mars for that?
Bad answer. We've already done a great deal of experimentation on that during Moon Missions, Sky Lab, and Mir. We know enough to where it can wait until the next Space Station or Moon Base is built. Especially if you look at it from the point of view right now, which is that we've already conducted those experiments with the ISS, so why keep it around when we can use that information to build a cheaper, easier to reach Space Station using the Ares V? So you think we already know enough? Gee, you must not be aware that every answer brings up new questions. Maybe you should dig up under a rock and live in blissful ignorance for the rest of your life. And what the fuck do you want to build another "useless" space station for? Weapons in space?
If I remember my libel law properly, just because it's false doesn't make it libel (at least in the states). For something to be libelous:
1) It must be false
2) It must have been uttered in *full knowledge of its falsehood*, or in reckless disregard for the truth.
3) It must have been uttered with "actual malace" So since I don't know if you beat your wife (or even have one), I'm free to say you do, because I don't have "*full knowledge of its falsehood*"?
So what's the story...the fact that he's doing the right thing here?
He's suing the correct person for (if the accusations are true - and you've seen Wikipedia troll edits, they probably are) a legitimate reason. So the story is that he's not an idiot suing Wikipedia like the rest of the idiots would? Errm, he's "doing the right thing" because the law won't allow him to sue Wikipedia. "Courts have clearly said you have to go after the source of the information," Sheftall said.
Doing the right thing because you can't do the wrong thing isn't really doing the right thing, is it?
More easily refutable lies by the troll. Hahahahahahaha! Hilarious:-D. You're obviously jealous that I'm the number one mac fanboy - however I will say that you're far, far whinier than I could ever be. Funny how you don't even try to defend your lies.
pple also only "prevents" playing of iTS music on other players the same way sellers of CDs prevent you from playing the music on tape decks or the exact same players.
Okaaaaaaaaay dude, whatever!
*Gives LarsT a big sloppy kiss*! So you admit you were wrong.
Tell you what. Name just one experiment that justifies the billions of dollars spent on the ISS. Only one. Preferrably an experiment that couldn't have been done cheaper from a dedicated satellite package. Anything related to long-term habitation of man in space - or are you going to wait until you go to Mars for that?
You mean after Space Lab? They used the Mir, for one.
I presume you mean Sky Lab? Space Lab is what NASA used to carry out short-term experiments. Mir wasn't available to NASA until it was nearing its End Of Life.
Apart from that, they waited until the ISS was done.
Exactly. They waited. Because the experiments weren't that important. And they're not important enough now to justify the terrible ROI we're seeing. Ohh, sure, they didn't wait because they had to. Suuure. If it had been important, they would have just went ahead as planned, igoring all budget cuts - or, better yet, simply build a space station out of gaffer tape and chewing gum. As for the Mir - 2/3rds of the lifetime. Can't argue away the fact that they did use it.
I already showed you that Apple doesn't keep anybody from selling non-DRMed mp4s, that's the music industry.
Incorrect. Apple is turning away artists who want to sell DRM free music on ITMS. Look who's changing the subject again. Not that it helps you in any way. Apple also only "prevents" playing of iTS music on other players the same way sellers of CDs prevent you from playing the music on tape decks or the exact same players.
No, CDs and Tape Decks have physical differences. The only difference between a normal mp4 and an Apple mp4 is that Apple has crippled it. The only thing crippled is your brain. The music on CDs can't be played on a tape deck - period.
The fact that you keep diverting from that fact shows who you are shilling for.
*rolls eyes* The fact that you think that I'm shilling for someone shows you only read Apple stories. More easily refutable lies by the troll. Go suck the cock of the music executive who's paying you off.
Sure, it certainly can't be because they are much better done at the ISS instead.
The ISS has only been available in the last few years. What was NASA doing in the other 20 years that these experiments were so cruicial in? You mean after Space Lab? They used the Mir, for one. Apart from that, they waited until the ISS was done.
it certainly is better suited than the Space Shuttle for anything that takes more than a week.
The extended life support modules of some of the Space Shuttles make them capable of flight times exceeding a month. For long term experiments, the shuttle has a cargo bay to deploy modules into orbit as necessary. It can then come back and retrieve them at a later date. The fact that the Shuttle is not used in this manner suggests that the experiments being conducted on the ISS are not as important as we're being lead to believe. Sure, it certainly can't be because they are much better done at the ISS instead.
Slashdot Mirror
How can anything the music industry wants be good for the consumer?
Show me 5 people who didn't by a non-iPod only because they had iTMS tunes. Come on, should be easy.
If Apple would open their DRM, the music industry would benefit. Ergo the consumer would lose. QED.
You know, it's about time somebody actually named a couple of people who would have bought one of the iPod killers if it hadn't been for those meddling iTunes store tunes.
Ahh, so you are one of those who wants Apple to pump up those losers who bet their money on PlaysForSure players to sell their tunes for them and failed despite having a headstart on both the availability of players and stores. Maybe they should have stuck to selling used cars?
Yeah, but why would you want to do THAT?
You are trying to prove that Apple is evil for not "opening" their DRM by pointing to the second-most successful online-music store that doesn't depend on Apple doing just that? Why are you insisting that Apple give welfare to companies that just can't cut it on their own?
Yeah, but what if you did? Let's say you've got some terrorist who killed your wife and daughter, and has planted a bomb that will kill millions of people. Time is ticking, and unless the police get the information they don't have time to search all the possible locations. You've got Carlos the terrorist handcuffed to a radiator, a pair of pliers and blowtorch. Oh, and Carlos starts goading you about how your wife and daughter pleaded for their lives. He is unarmed.
Good I can feel your hatred. Take up the pliers and the blowtorch and torture him with all your anger and your journey to the Dark Side will be complete.
This message was paid for by Fox News on behalf of the Committee to Elect Anyone But McCain. You forgot to mention that while any American who knows something is trained to withstand torture, but everybody else isn't (at least not the improved American torture, errrmm, interogation).
Are you kidding me? The whole reason that other music systems aren't as popular as ipod/Itunes combo is becuase of they dont have the simplicity of the ipods design and the songs they have on itunes form the store wont work on their player.
Oh, yeah, keep ignoring that PlaysForSure is older and already had several (lame) stores before the iTMS. There is very little content that you can buy on the iTMS but not on one of several PlaysForSure based stores.The claim that people would rush out to buy non-iPods if only they could play music bought from the iT(M)S is nothing but dumb excuse for the lacking sales.
Hahahahahaahahahahahahahaha!
That's the way! When you can't attack the argument, attack the person. (I note you didn't touch the substance of my post)
A clearer ad hominem attack I've never seen. Thanks for admitting to your tactics.
Perhaps I just don't think there's any point arguing with someone who describes me as a cocksucking riaa shill?
Translation: you don't want to argue with someone who discovered your little secret.
Bad answer. We've already done a great deal of experimentation on that during Moon Missions, Sky Lab, and Mir. We know enough to where it can wait until the next Space Station or Moon Base is built. Especially if you look at it from the point of view right now, which is that we've already conducted those experiments with the ISS, so why keep it around when we can use that information to build a cheaper, easier to reach Space Station using the Ares V? So you think we already know enough? Gee, you must not be aware that every answer brings up new questions. Maybe you should dig up under a rock and live in blissful ignorance for the rest of your life. And what the fuck do you want to build another "useless" space station for? Weapons in space?
Sure, ignorance is bliss in this case - if you don't know what the truth is, how can you be recklessly disregarding it.
1) It must be false
2) It must have been uttered in *full knowledge of its falsehood*, or in reckless disregard for the truth.
3) It must have been uttered with "actual malace"
So since I don't know if you beat your wife (or even have one), I'm free to say you do, because I don't have "*full knowledge of its falsehood*"?
He's suing the correct person for (if the accusations are true - and you've seen Wikipedia troll edits, they probably are) a legitimate reason. So the story is that he's not an idiot suing Wikipedia like the rest of the idiots would? Errm, he's "doing the right thing" because the law won't allow him to sue Wikipedia. "Courts have clearly said you have to go after the source of the information," Sheftall said.
Doing the right thing because you can't do the wrong thing isn't really doing the right thing, is it?
Hahahahahahaha! Hilarious
Okaaaaaaaaay dude, whatever!
*Gives LarsT a big sloppy kiss*! So you admit you were wrong.
I presume you mean Sky Lab? Space Lab is what NASA used to carry out short-term experiments. Mir wasn't available to NASA until it was nearing its End Of Life.
Exactly. They waited. Because the experiments weren't that important. And they're not important enough now to justify the terrible ROI we're seeing. Ohh, sure, they didn't wait because they had to. Suuure. If it had been important, they would have just went ahead as planned, igoring all budget cuts - or, better yet, simply build a space station out of gaffer tape and chewing gum. As for the Mir - 2/3rds of the lifetime. Can't argue away the fact that they did use it.
Incorrect. Apple is turning away artists who want to sell DRM free music on ITMS.
Look who's changing the subject again. Not that it helps you in any way. Apple also only "prevents" playing of iTS music on other players the same way sellers of CDs prevent you from playing the music on tape decks or the exact same players.
No, CDs and Tape Decks have physical differences. The only difference between a normal mp4 and an Apple mp4 is that Apple has crippled it.
The only thing crippled is your brain. The music on CDs can't be played on a tape deck - period. The fact that you keep diverting from that fact shows who you are shilling for.
*rolls eyes* The fact that you think that I'm shilling for someone shows you only read Apple stories. More easily refutable lies by the troll. Go suck the cock of the music executive who's paying you off.
The ISS has only been available in the last few years. What was NASA doing in the other 20 years that these experiments were so cruicial in? You mean after Space Lab? They used the Mir, for one. Apart from that, they waited until the ISS was done.
The extended life support modules of some of the Space Shuttles make them capable of flight times exceeding a month. For long term experiments, the shuttle has a cargo bay to deploy modules into orbit as necessary. It can then come back and retrieve them at a later date. The fact that the Shuttle is not used in this manner suggests that the experiments being conducted on the ISS are not as important as we're being lead to believe. Sure, it certainly can't be because they are much better done at the ISS instead.