Not licensing Fair Play has nothing to do with making it more secure. It has to do with being able to roll out fixes to counter security breaches in a timely manner.
Apples decision to limit their OS to their hardware is what is killing their adoption rate. This is false. Apple's "adoption rate" is in fact going up. Apple had a cloning program in the mid-90s. It almost killed them. Their marketshare fell during that period.
Macs are not unreasonable expensive - Apple just doesn't compete in the extreme low end of the market. If you want a $500 Mac, there are used systems available to buy.
I do the exact same thing except with C++. Using a MacBook Pro as my laptop allows me to have both Mac and PC when I travel. For me BootCamp is better than a VM because my app is a client that uses a fair amount of the processor.
I moved to Long Island maybe a year ago and I have had occasion to go into Manhattan a couple of times on business. It seems like if you step in front of a vehicle, you would probably get hit as many of the driver go very fast through intersections.
So, in theory I could say that a company's website had a copy of something I legitimately owned and they get taken down and I can't be charged with fraud?
Excellent! Microsoft.com is currently hosting a picture of a picture of my dog that i took in fourth grade. Please shut them down.
Nope, still don't buy it. Why doesn't Microsoft have the same problems? This is ALSO covered in the article. If wide licensing of DRM tech was the answer, why did Microsoft abandon Plays For Sure in favor of a closed DRM model with the Zune?
You can either choose to believe Steve's reasoning that it is the same reason that he states for not licensing Fair Play, or you can believe that Microsoft is INCREDIBLE STUPID as the fact that Zune doesn't use Plays for Sure was a huge black eye for them. It added to customer confusion and isn't helping Zune succeed.
Say what you will of Steve Jobs, he whole-heartedly believes in Apple's products, and in their ability to compete on a level playing-field.
Complete and utter bullshit. If he truly did so, then Apple wouldn't be using that DRM that they were "forced into using" to lock you into their hardware and software. They're getting sued over this in Europe for a reason.
I'll believe that line of reasoning when I'm able to use music bought and downloaded from their music store on anything other than iTunes and my iPod. And no, jumping through hoops and degrading music quality to remove the DRM doesn't count. Why not try the same thing from the Zune store?
If you think the media companies will go for digital watermarking as an alternative to DRM, I suggest you talk to some of the technical sales people at Digimarc. They will tell you that it is a hard sell. That is why their company has not done well financially.
What you are saying is totally false to fact. How is FairPlay ineffective against piracy? Answer, it is effective against piracy. It was broken once by the PlayFair/HYMM project and then Apple had to upgrade iTunes. Since then, no breaky.
And as Jobs points out in the article, upgrading everyone's iTunes and iPods in a limited Window was difficult when it is just Apple involved. Add in a zillion other vendors and it becomes much harder.
Second, an iTunes file IS linked to a particular user account. Try to import someone else's iTMS purchases into your copy of iTunes. You'll get the choice of either authorizing the computer for their account or not importing the file. True, if you can get it onto an iPod, you can play it.
Ok, you're not the only one to point this out. I stand corrected. It still doesn't change that I am opposed to the concept of DRM. So am I, but there is a huge difference between DRM that is well thought out and tries really hard to let people do legitimate things (such as FairPlay) and DRM that is designed poorly and has many flaws that screw customers (such as the reports I'm hearing about the DRM on Vista).
The computer I originally downloaded them on no longer exists, so I have no way to deauthorize it. False. There is a way to deauthorize it. From Apple's website:
How do I deauthorize all of my computers? If you have authorized five computers, a button labeled "Deauthorize All" will appear in your Account Information screen. This button will deauthorize all computers associated with your account. You can then reauthorize up to 5 computers. Note: You can only use this feature once a year. Apple isn't as stupid/evil as you think.
No they don't. CDs are digital music, too. (Or did you think they were analog?)
Most of the music sold is on CDs. There are several reasons for this, but one is that people don't like DRM.
Without DRM, Apple has the chance to be the #1 music retailer. With DRM, I don't think they ever will because sooner or later you get fed up with DRM and do what Bill Gates suggests and just buy CDs.
So from what you are saying, I take it that you don't buy his argument that by licensing FairPlay to other vendors, it increases the likelihood that they keys will get loose.
And to say his statistics are "bunk" because of exactly the point he is making is just strange.
Also, by posting this is he not advocating that record companies allow Apple to sell DRM free music? What is this magical thing that he can do to force this? My guess is that the contract he has requires blanket DRM on all commercial music and that this is at the insistance of the large labels.
Apple will blame anyone but themselves and try to spin it so that they don't look bad. As opposed to every other company/person/government agency/school/church/whatever than always blames themselves and spins things to make themselves look as bad as possible.
Feh, he's only saying the exact same thing ("don't blame us, they made us do it!") that Microsoft says. Actions speak louder than words. Of course, this is Slashdot, so it will be proof of Apple's godliness and Microsoft's perfidy. As an Apple fan who hates Microsof's products, I have to say the following: I do not blame Microsoft for DRM in media files. Clearly the music companies and movie studios have demanded this.
The fact is that iTMS was the FIRST legal online music store. Apple had to do a lot of work to convince the music companies to allow legal distribution. They did not have the music companies over a barrel as I've heard some people claim. They were negotiating from a position of weakness. It was months before iTMS even had enough sales to say they were selling more than vinyl LPs.
As Bill Gates pointed out, from the point of view of the individual consumer, ripping CDs still makes more sense than iTunes music store for a number of reasons: no DRM, get a higher quality copy of the music, you have a physical media as a backup if your hard disk fails. The iTunes store however, is still more convienient. So, it is not without value, but I often choose to buy a used physical CD via Amazon marketplace rather than buy from the iTunes store for precisely the reasons I stated. So, ITMS isn't locking people into the iPod via DRM - DRM is often blocking people such as myself from buying from the iTunes store.
Obviously a DRM free iTunes store would be better than what we have now. I think it would be MORE popular, not less. Would iTunes have competition, yes they would since obviously other vendors could sell DRM free music. OTOH, I think Apple could still be competitive in such an environment. Their store is easy to use and nice.
I think this article basically says two things that I didn't know before I read it. First, it puts Apple on record as opposing DRM. Second, he gives an argument against licensing FairPlay to other vendors that I hadn't heard or thought of before (i.e. that other vendors would leak the keys and this would require the iTunes store to be shut down.)
You are aware that Kennedy and Kerry are the senators for Massachusetts and that there's a lot more in Massachusetts than just Boston, right? As far as running for statewide office goes, I think you are wrong. Win Boston - you win. Lose Boston - you lose.
Basically the same thing happens in Oregon and Washington with Seattle and Portland.
Apple's move into the music business was a blatant violation of their agreement with Apple Corps The judge in the case disagrees with you. You are not a judge. You lose.
Didn't you know his goal is to be on the board of every company in the world that produces entertainment that can be digitized? If so, he is doing a very lousy job since he is on the board of directors of exactly two companies: Disney and Apple. He is the CEO of Apple and the largest shareholder in Disney (because of the Pixar buyout). He is not, for example, on the board of Viacom or Time Warner or Sony.
California is a very, very different place from the rest of the US. Lots of places in the US can be said to be "very very different" than the rest of the country: the South, Louisiana, Florida, NYC, Washington D.C., Boston, Kentucky, Nevada, Alaska, Hawaii, Texas, the Pacific Northwest. All of these areas have local flavor and I've heard people say each of these areas "is really like the US".
Slashdot Mirror
Not licensing Fair Play has nothing to do with making it more secure. It has to do with being able to roll out fixes to counter security breaches in a timely manner.
Macs are not unreasonable expensive - Apple just doesn't compete in the extreme low end of the market. If you want a $500 Mac, there are used systems available to buy.
I do the exact same thing except with C++. Using a MacBook Pro as my laptop allows me to have both Mac and PC when I travel. For me BootCamp is better than a VM because my app is a client that uses a fair amount of the processor.
I moved to Long Island maybe a year ago and I have had occasion to go into Manhattan a couple of times on business. It seems like if you step in front of a vehicle, you would probably get hit as many of the driver go very fast through intersections.
For what its worth, I agree. I prefer to buy CDs and rip them - even though I love buying from the iTunes store, I don't like the DRM.
I have probably bought 30 albums via iTunes. Plus some individual songs and some TV Shows. But, I'm starting to buy CDs again instead.
Want some rye?
'Course ya do!
So, in theory I could say that a company's website had a copy of something I legitimately owned and they get taken down and I can't be charged with fraud?
Excellent! Microsoft.com is currently hosting a picture of a picture of my dog that i took in fourth grade. Please shut them down.
I hope there are penalties for fraudulent takedown notices.
You can either choose to believe Steve's reasoning that it is the same reason that he states for not licensing Fair Play, or you can believe that Microsoft is INCREDIBLE STUPID as the fact that Zune doesn't use Plays for Sure was a huge black eye for them. It added to customer confusion and isn't helping Zune succeed.
Complete and utter bullshit. If he truly did so, then Apple wouldn't be using that DRM that they were "forced into using" to lock you into their hardware and software. They're getting sued over this in Europe for a reason.
I'll believe that line of reasoning when I'm able to use music bought and downloaded from their music store on anything other than iTunes and my iPod. And no, jumping through hoops and degrading music quality to remove the DRM doesn't count. Why not try the same thing from the Zune store?
If you think the media companies will go for digital watermarking as an alternative to DRM, I suggest you talk to some of the technical sales people at Digimarc. They will tell you that it is a hard sell. That is why their company has not done well financially.
This is NOT Apple's fault.
What you are saying is totally false to fact. How is FairPlay ineffective against piracy? Answer, it is effective against piracy. It was broken once by the PlayFair/HYMM project and then Apple had to upgrade iTunes. Since then, no breaky.
And as Jobs points out in the article, upgrading everyone's iTunes and iPods in a limited Window was difficult when it is just Apple involved. Add in a zillion other vendors and it becomes much harder.
Second, an iTunes file IS linked to a particular user account. Try to import someone else's iTMS purchases into your copy of iTunes. You'll get the choice of either authorizing the computer for their account or not importing the file. True, if you can get it onto an iPod, you can play it.
If you have authorized five computers, a button labeled "Deauthorize All" will appear in your Account Information screen. This button will deauthorize all computers associated with your account. You can then reauthorize up to 5 computers. Note: You can only use this feature once a year. Apple isn't as stupid/evil as you think.
No they don't. CDs are digital music, too. (Or did you think they were analog?)
Most of the music sold is on CDs. There are several reasons for this, but one is that people don't like DRM.
Without DRM, Apple has the chance to be the #1 music retailer. With DRM, I don't think they ever will because sooner or later you get fed up with DRM and do what Bill Gates suggests and just buy CDs.
So from what you are saying, I take it that you don't buy his argument that by licensing FairPlay to other vendors, it increases the likelihood that they keys will get loose.
And to say his statistics are "bunk" because of exactly the point he is making is just strange.
Also, by posting this is he not advocating that record companies allow Apple to sell DRM free music? What is this magical thing that he can do to force this? My guess is that the contract he has requires blanket DRM on all commercial music and that this is at the insistance of the large labels.
The fact is that iTMS was the FIRST legal online music store. Apple had to do a lot of work to convince the music companies to allow legal distribution. They did not have the music companies over a barrel as I've heard some people claim. They were negotiating from a position of weakness. It was months before iTMS even had enough sales to say they were selling more than vinyl LPs.
As Bill Gates pointed out, from the point of view of the individual consumer, ripping CDs still makes more sense than iTunes music store for a number of reasons: no DRM, get a higher quality copy of the music, you have a physical media as a backup if your hard disk fails. The iTunes store however, is still more convienient. So, it is not without value, but I often choose to buy a used physical CD via Amazon marketplace rather than buy from the iTunes store for precisely the reasons I stated. So, ITMS isn't locking people into the iPod via DRM - DRM is often blocking people such as myself from buying from the iTunes store.
Obviously a DRM free iTunes store would be better than what we have now. I think it would be MORE popular, not less. Would iTunes have competition, yes they would since obviously other vendors could sell DRM free music. OTOH, I think Apple could still be competitive in such an environment. Their store is easy to use and nice.
I think this article basically says two things that I didn't know before I read it. First, it puts Apple on record as opposing DRM. Second, he gives an argument against licensing FairPlay to other vendors that I hadn't heard or thought of before (i.e. that other vendors would leak the keys and this would require the iTunes store to be shut down.)
Basically the same thing happens in Oregon and Washington with Seattle and Portland.
I completely agree with your argument here. What is so damn hard about getting a warrant??