With the exception that the terms of purchasing the songs from the iTMS as specificaly stated in the contract presented to you before you enter into the transactions was that you would not circumvent the DRM on the file.
This certainly doesn't suprise me, however, I find something odd about the letter they posted. Something about that letter just doesn't seems right. Granted, I don't have much experience with C&D letters, but there's something about the language in the letter that seems off.
Ok, and how is that any different than windows? If you buy an OEM copy of windows or a bootleg copy, you're not going to get any official support. So how is downloading an iso off of linuxiso and not getting official/phone support any different? If you want support, you buy the official product from someone like SuSe or redhat.
Actualy, if you get an OEM copy of windows, chances are, you're getting support from the OEM. If you purposefuly bought or bootleged an OEM copy, chances are you know a lot more than Joe Sixpack about fixing your computer.
That is a moot point. The only reason is because linux doesn't have enough market share. As the market share increases so do the number of applications. The two will slowly rise together. People don't complain Solaris has a limited number of applications, so why do they complain about Linux?
Because Solaris isn't trying to be a desktop OS?
What you are experiencing is The Mac User Delema (tm). You don't have a lot of software, but that wont change until you have a larger userbase, but you won't have a larger userbase untill you have more software. Have fun, it's a great argument to have with people.
Ok, so someone said that one of the problems in Linux is the lack of financial software. Someone presented financial software, someone else pointed out that the software is very localized and as such doesn't do much good for people outside of the local area, and someone else says FIX IT YOURSELF. And you wonder why Linux uptake is so slow.
People buy commercial software because it does what they want, it doesn't matter how free linux is, if it doesn't do what people want, they're not going to use it.
How would they be violating your property? In the interest in collecting evidence for the accident, they plug a cable into your car's computer and pull the data.
Tiny code might make for a better browser or word processor, but it wont make it a fun game.
Someone never played duckhunt.
Re:Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it
on
Apple Revises eMac
·
· Score: 1
And Aqua is pure Apple, so why do they have to give it back to the community? They gave back darwin which includes all the changes they made to the BSD base, install your favorite WM and you have a system.
Well, if you're really feeling like taking on a project, you could always gut an eMac and stick it in a box. If you can't find a way to adapt your monitor to the graphics card output, you can always use the external mirroring out. Not an ideal solution, but if you want to hack the hardware a bit it might be fun.
On your second point, it may be as simple as not everyone feels that DRM on the whole is evil. It's the implimentation. So far we likes Apple's implimentation.
The points about KDE and Gnome are totally the opposite from all of my experiences. OS X it utterly counter-intuitive, especially when you don't have a scroll wheel or a right-click!
You're confusing counter-intuitiveness with "Doesn't do things like I'm used to". When a user sits down at a machine, they should be able to see a path to acomplishing their goal of getting whatever they want done. That's why windows has a start button, and macs have the apple menu, and gnome has a foot (wtf?). They're points to begin at, even if you don't know anything about the system. The more options a user is initialy presented with, the more confusing it is and the less intuitive it is.
Open Source interface design varies, I'll agree with that, but I wouldn't class it as fundamental problem.
It's a fundamental problem when they very from app to app in the same system. User expereience should be consistant from app to app. ctrl-p should always print, print should always be in the file menu and it should always call up a dialoge box or provide some feedback. Sadly, even this simple thing is not consistant in OSS programs (and some commercial programs too)
Documentation in Open Source projects is world class! A wealth of HOWTOs, extensive in-project documentation, an amazing community - its all there.
Except the wealth of information is burried under technobable, man pages and forums and chats full of RTFMers. No that's not the way to do things. As she said, it's nice that there is a full community out there, but how the hell is someone supposed to get help when they can't get to the community? (ex: When I went to install SuSE I did an FTP install, following all the printed directions, and found myself confronted with 50 some drivers to choose from because SuSE didn't like my network card. And every driver asked for a set of arguments. What arguments? I don't know, and I couldn't find out because I couldn't start my computer to get to the internet because I didn't have an OS to install.) COmunity is ony good if the users can get to the comunity and get the information they need quickly. Otherwise, it's fairly worthless to the end user.
Compare this to Mac OS and Windows where the "built in" help is meant to guide you through. Trying to do something other than click on an icon in Microsoft Windows? Want the documentation for it? You're out of luck...
Speaking from the mac side of things, there has always been a very friendly and willing mac comunity, extensive documentation online, basic step by step in the OS and simple getting started in paper documentation. And each one told you exactly where to look for more information.
The whole article is pure insanity. It seems like the author holds some sort of grudge against certain Open Source projects!
No, the author is merely pointing out the same trend that some of us have been pointing out for the last 7 years.
Perhaps then he shouldn't have agreed to the contract and bought the music no? If I signa contract with my landlord that says I can't put holes in my walls, but I decide i don't believe in solid walls, should I be allowed to just put holes in my walls and cry foul when my landlord comes after me.
As for CSS, that may have something to do with the fact that you don't sign any contracts before you make the purchase.
Except it's not like an EULA. When I buy office, I don't get the EULA until I've paid for and opened the product. At which point, I have no chance to back out of the contract without loss of money. You get the TOS from iTMS BEFORE you buy anything. That's the difference, and it's an important one.
Exactly, which was why people liked Apple's DRM scheme, because it was easy to legaly get arround (as allowed by their software) but not easy or cost effective enough to make mass redistribution viable.
However, people still bitch because they're going to lose quality. That's also why people aren't happy with playfair, because you were given a legal and easy way to get unrestricted use without getting on the wrong legal end of things.
That whole if I make an exception for you argument. Under the current system, Apple can go to any record company and say here's the deal 99 cents per song, no ifs ands or buts, unrestricted playback (on authorized machines), and burning. Take it or leave it.
By doing that, they make everything consistant throughout the store.
It's not semantics, it's very much a matter of use.
The reason shrinkwrap licenses like EULA's don't hold is because they are contracts provided after the purchase of the item in question. So you have no chance to back out of the contract before you pay money.
Since you have to agree to the iTunes Music Store terms before you pay money, the contract is quite binding.
Slashdot Mirror
With the exception that the terms of purchasing the songs from the iTMS as specificaly stated in the contract presented to you before you enter into the transactions was that you would not circumvent the DRM on the file.
This certainly doesn't suprise me, however, I find something odd about the letter they posted. Something about that letter just doesn't seems right. Granted, I don't have much experience with C&D letters, but there's something about the language in the letter that seems off.
Ok, and how is that any different than windows? If you buy an OEM copy of windows or a bootleg copy, you're not going to get any official support. So how is downloading an iso off of linuxiso and not getting official/phone support any different? If you want support, you buy the official product from someone like SuSe or redhat.
Actualy, if you get an OEM copy of windows, chances are, you're getting support from the OEM. If you purposefuly bought or bootleged an OEM copy, chances are you know a lot more than Joe Sixpack about fixing your computer.
That is a moot point. The only reason is because linux doesn't have enough market share. As the market share increases so do the number of applications. The two will slowly rise together. People don't complain Solaris has a limited number of applications, so why do they complain about Linux?
Because Solaris isn't trying to be a desktop OS?
What you are experiencing is The Mac User Delema (tm). You don't have a lot of software, but that wont change until you have a larger userbase, but you won't have a larger userbase untill you have more software. Have fun, it's a great argument to have with people.
Ok, so someone said that one of the problems in Linux is the lack of financial software. Someone presented financial software, someone else pointed out that the software is very localized and as such doesn't do much good for people outside of the local area, and someone else says FIX IT YOURSELF. And you wonder why Linux uptake is so slow.
People buy commercial software because it does what they want, it doesn't matter how free linux is, if it doesn't do what people want, they're not going to use it.
Politics?
How would they be violating your property? In the interest in collecting evidence for the accident, they plug a cable into your car's computer and pull the data.
Plug it into the firewire port?
Well wouldn't being in an accident be in violation of the law? I mean destruction of property, impedeing the normal flow of traffic. etc
Tiny code might make for a better browser or word processor, but it wont make it a fun game.
Someone never played duckhunt.
And Aqua is pure Apple, so why do they have to give it back to the community? They gave back darwin which includes all the changes they made to the BSD base, install your favorite WM and you have a system.
Well, if you're really feeling like taking on a project, you could always gut an eMac and stick it in a box. If you can't find a way to adapt your monitor to the graphics card output, you can always use the external mirroring out. Not an ideal solution, but if you want to hack the hardware a bit it might be fun.
On your second point, it may be as simple as not everyone feels that DRM on the whole is evil. It's the implimentation. So far we likes Apple's implimentation.
The points about KDE and Gnome are totally the opposite from all of my experiences. OS X it utterly counter-intuitive, especially when you don't have a scroll wheel or a right-click!
You're confusing counter-intuitiveness with "Doesn't do things like I'm used to". When a user sits down at a machine, they should be able to see a path to acomplishing their goal of getting whatever they want done. That's why windows has a start button, and macs have the apple menu, and gnome has a foot (wtf?). They're points to begin at, even if you don't know anything about the system. The more options a user is initialy presented with, the more confusing it is and the less intuitive it is.
Open Source interface design varies, I'll agree with that, but I wouldn't class it as fundamental problem.
It's a fundamental problem when they very from app to app in the same system. User expereience should be consistant from app to app. ctrl-p should always print, print should always be in the file menu and it should always call up a dialoge box or provide some feedback. Sadly, even this simple thing is not consistant in OSS programs (and some commercial programs too)
Documentation in Open Source projects is world class! A wealth of HOWTOs, extensive in-project documentation, an amazing community - its all there.
Except the wealth of information is burried under technobable, man pages and forums and chats full of RTFMers. No that's not the way to do things. As she said, it's nice that there is a full community out there, but how the hell is someone supposed to get help when they can't get to the community? (ex: When I went to install SuSE I did an FTP install, following all the printed directions, and found myself confronted with 50 some drivers to choose from because SuSE didn't like my network card. And every driver asked for a set of arguments. What arguments? I don't know, and I couldn't find out because I couldn't start my computer to get to the internet because I didn't have an OS to install.) COmunity is ony good if the users can get to the comunity and get the information they need quickly. Otherwise, it's fairly worthless to the end user.
Compare this to Mac OS and Windows where the "built in" help is meant to guide you through. Trying to do something other than click on an icon in Microsoft Windows? Want the documentation for it? You're out of luck...
Speaking from the mac side of things, there has always been a very friendly and willing mac comunity, extensive documentation online, basic step by step in the OS and simple getting started in paper documentation. And each one told you exactly where to look for more information.
The whole article is pure insanity. It seems like the author holds some sort of grudge against certain Open Source projects!
No, the author is merely pointing out the same trend that some of us have been pointing out for the last 7 years.
And there we have it ladies and gentlemen, OSS is not about freedom, it's about capitalism in it's truest form. Put up or shut up.
It does hurt Apple though. The more stuff like this happens, the less the music industry is going to want to play with something as lax as FairPlay.
Welcome to mac user hell, circa 1997, enjoy your stay.
Negative. Pixar/Disney contract ended. Legal end of contract.
Copying LPs to casset is fine, because you never signed a contract when you bought the LP saying you couldn't.
Likewise you can copy your AAC to CD all you want.
You singed a contract with iTMS. If you don't like it, maybe you need to renegotiate the contract.
1) You also agreed to a contract before you bought the song. Contract binding.
One is a contract violation, the other is not.
Using your audio tracks fairly would include abiding by the CONTRACT you agreed to BEFORE you bought the tracks.
Perhaps then he shouldn't have agreed to the contract and bought the music no? If I signa contract with my landlord that says I can't put holes in my walls, but I decide i don't believe in solid walls, should I be allowed to just put holes in my walls and cry foul when my landlord comes after me.
As for CSS, that may have something to do with the fact that you don't sign any contracts before you make the purchase.
It's an important distinction.
Except it's not like an EULA. When I buy office, I don't get the EULA until I've paid for and opened the product. At which point, I have no chance to back out of the contract without loss of money. You get the TOS from iTMS BEFORE you buy anything. That's the difference, and it's an important one.
Exactly, which was why people liked Apple's DRM scheme, because it was easy to legaly get arround (as allowed by their software) but not easy or cost effective enough to make mass redistribution viable.
However, people still bitch because they're going to lose quality. That's also why people aren't happy with playfair, because you were given a legal and easy way to get unrestricted use without getting on the wrong legal end of things.
That whole if I make an exception for you argument. Under the current system, Apple can go to any record company and say here's the deal 99 cents per song, no ifs ands or buts, unrestricted playback (on authorized machines), and burning. Take it or leave it.
By doing that, they make everything consistant throughout the store.
It's not semantics, it's very much a matter of use.
The reason shrinkwrap licenses like EULA's don't hold is because they are contracts provided after the purchase of the item in question. So you have no chance to back out of the contract before you pay money.
Since you have to agree to the iTunes Music Store terms before you pay money, the contract is quite binding.