That is about the same as a night out with the gf.
I believed you up until the gf part.;-) Got to love the old slashdot stereotypes. I almost put in the "in your mother's basement the GP written by me.:)
Ok, at times when I have had a gf, I would spend at least that much. Consider that dinner for two at a nice restaurant can run you close to 40 bucks, then add drinks, club cover charges and you get up to 78 bucks pretty quickly.
Not really, that is just your opinion. I've got no problem with you having a differing opinion. What I do have a problem with is you being a prick about it and not being willing to accept a differing viewpoint at face value.
The problem is: When do you simply accept a differing viewpoint and when do you call someone out on something you know to be wrong?
There is no right or wrong when it comes to subjective things like this. None of us have yet seen iLife 07 or Leopard yet and I personally found value in Tiger enough to upgrade to it on my old mac before I sold it and bought a MBP.
"It is clean, uncluttered and lets me get on with my tasks.When I see Windows' reminders, popups, and other interruptions, I appreciate its absence in OS X."Isn't it funny that the only person to sledge their non-choice of OS was a Mac user? Did you totally miss that the guy was a switcher from windows? That might be why he mentioned the contrast between the two systems. You might want to loosen that tinfoil hat a little.
"I find it hard to find things to be excited about, given that new rehashes of iWork and iLife are produced each year and it is hard to justify buying each new version, even modestly priced as they are."
There, now the opinion is more realistic. Not really, that is just your opinion. I've got no problem with you having a differing opinion. What I do have a problem with is you being a prick about it and not being willing to accept a differing viewpoint at face value.
No but I smell a paid troll named Veinor. iLife is cheap for what you get with it. You see, some of us used to be poor geeks but we got off our ass and got a real job and a life. Maybe your should get off your ass and do the same. iLife is $79.00 USD with free shipping. That is about the same as a night out with the gf. I would not even miss that money.
$600 for a DRM-riddled phone?...no thanks. Your calls are DRM'ed? No. Your Contacts? No. Your pictures? No. Your MP3s? No. Your iTMS purchases? Yes. What if you have no iTMS purchases? Then you have no DRM.
You are right, there is a difference
on
Norway Outlaws iTunes
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
"But what about video game consoles? If one wants to play "Gears of War", one is locked into Microsoft's Xbox 360 hardware. Same for any console wrt games exclusive to that console. Is Norway going to outlaw video game consoles as well?"
There is a huge difference between coding games for multiple platforms and encoding music in a file format that multiple media players can read. Microsoft released WMA and WMV for a wide array of audio and audio/video players. Why can't Apple? The difference is that unlike consoles, most songs are available on all stores. You are not forced to choose based on the content available. The only people without a choice are mac users but that is not the fault of Apple. MSFT chose to discontinue the development of WMP and they never intended on bring store and DRM support to Mac OS X.
Apple does not have to license if they do not want to. You are free to choose either an iPod, a Playsforsure device or a Zune if you are a windows user as Microsoft chose to lock out Mac users from the market. This lockout is part of the impetuous to the creation of the iPod in the first place. Apple wanted to provide its mac users with mac os alternative to the window only window media ecosystem. I think MSFT was foolish for not trying to maximize their potential market in the first place.
I don't think you get that Apple makes most of it's music profit on iPod sales rather than music. They knew from the start that it would take a long time for sale of music to brake even let alone show a profit. For this reason, they do not have an incentive to license to others. MSFT is about long term profits and domination while Apple is interested in creating useful products and making a nice profit on them.
My point is that DRM in itself is not evil. It's when DRM interferes with the user experience.
Agreed. Also when it infringes on other rights like fair use.
In a market economy such as the United States, a content owner has the right to distribute the content as they please as long as it's not ilegal, in the sense it becomes fraud, false advertising or some other crime.
In a way.
If DRM was truly a consumer nightmare, the demand would decrease to the point of bankrupting Apple.
Most people don't know what's going on, so no. That wouldn't be the case. The problem is, Apple's DRM is evil, because it infringes on fair rights, lock-ins etc.
Users would choose "open" sources of music. OK, I can see the point that "open" sources of music don't exist, since the RIAA owns most all content. However, you could choose "indie" music much like you choose Linux over Microsoft Windows. Most indie music is open because it's becoming established.
Guess what? I haven't bought DRMed music or movies ever. Nor do I intend to either -- I have better things to worry about than if something will play on my system, media player or if someone may decide to revoke my rights to play something I bought. No it does not interfere with your fair use rights. Fair use rights do not guarantee the right to make exact digital copies of copyrighted media. For example, photocopying excerpts of a book or including quotes in your research falls under fair use while obtaining the complete digital copy of the book and using it to distribute digital or printed copies does not. Those photocopies are imperfect representations of the original printed book.
In the same way, burning and re-ripping iTMS songs will provide you access to your songs regardless of platform for the purposes of fair use. Alternatively, mac users can use their iLife apps to obtain digital copies of their purchased songs without DRM for the purposes of fair use and they can also incorporate the songs in their personal home media projects.
Neither the PlaysorSure or Zune ecosystem allows for exercising of fair use rights by any other means than by burning and re-ripping the songs from an audio CD.
"MSFT at least make the attempt to compete by supporting their DRM system on Mac OS X"
You're completely ignorant of the problems of implementing DRM. If you don't control the software all the way down to the hardware level, your DRM will be hacked 100 times faster. Yet Apple is willing to live with that. They know that any DRM will eventually be cracked anyway and so they will make their best effort without going to the extreme of trying to control the entire stack even on the platform they own. I what your suggesting is poor excuse given that even MSFT's DRM on windows has already been cracked.
You contradicting yourself all over the place. On the one hand, you agree that MSFT actively supports their own format and Apple supports open standards like MP4 but then you expect Apple to license technology from MSFT. Why?
Apple does not force anyone to use iTMS. I bought my first iPod long before there was an iTMS anywhere let alone in my country (Canada). I was attracted to the device because it was well supported on the mac and because I found it to be the easiest to use. Guess where I got my music? CD's, eMusic and other sources.
Why are you having such a problem with understanding that I do not want to run windows? There is no way for me to access MTP based players on any other platform. All playsforsure devices use MTP rather than acting as a mass storage device IIRC.
I do not have to use iTMS with my iPod but I choose to because I find it convienient. I have also bought audio books from audible.com (a company separate from Apple) and they work fine in iTunes and the iPod. If I was so inclined, I could use a number of different applications on windows, OS X or linux to manage my non-DRM'ed MP3s and AAC files but again I prefer iTunes.
You do not seem to get that the iPod is not tied to one platform, that iTunes not tied to one platform either and that you do not need to use iTMS if you don't want to and you can simply manage Mp3 with your iPod or other supported devices.
Most consumers are not concerned in the least. They really don't care and are perfectly happy with the iPod and iTMS. It is only geeks that make a big deal out of it because they want to use the most geeky gadget with the most complex UI they can find.
Apple could get a license and add WMP playback, too. Creative can't get a license for that Apple DRM so their Zen will not be able to play music downloaded from iTunes. Apple's competition cannot add a feature Apple's products have and that feature is of no original value, it's value comes from another product Apple provides. This violates antitrust laws. What are you basing this on? Do you have evidence that MSFT would license to Apple? Why would Apple want to do this? If MSFT was the least bit interested in seeing WMA technology on other computer platforms than Windows, we would have already seen an up to date version on not only windows but OS X and Linux. You should not expect Apple to actively support a competing media format just to make you happy. It is up to MSFT to support other platforms if they want business from those users. MSFT are trying to use their media technology to keep a stranglehold on marketshare for their Operating Systems.
I'm so sick of hearing the same FUD over again over again. License WMA/DRM from MSFT? Please. How Apple does violate antitrust laws? Apple made the iPod, they made the ITMS. They own both products. I do not see how this is similar at all to how MSFT tried to control a platform (PCs) that it did not manufacture, design or even sell. MSFT tried to block competing software from running on OEM machines that they did not own. There is a thriving third-party addon industry surrounding the iPod and Creative has become an official licensee for accessories.
Why waste all that space on a file that was already compressed in the first place? Hugely redundant. You're right. Just stick with iTunes and the iPod.:) Alternatively, you can delete the WAV file after you have converted to FLAC.
Yes but if you have music from iTunes you can't buy a player from a different vendor. Currently iTunes is the biggest store around so it's the first target. MS licenses the WMP formats to other vendors so they can offer content in that format or build players that use it. But you do not seem to get it. I play my songs on my iPod, my mac at home or on my windows PC at work. If I were to use one of those licensees of WMP, I would be forced to use windows on all of my machines including my Macbook Pro to access and manage the purchases in addition to having to use a playsforsure portable device.
Who cares about inferior portable players? I define inferiority based on a lack of usability in the default configuration, not how many features it has. I care about my lack of platform close when it comes to WMP. It only works on windows. iTunes is cross platform compatible while WMP is not.
Apple makes/designs the hardware and software. They provide an end to end solution. Apple also is not preventing other stores or players from entering into the market. Many mac users would be all to happy to see MSFT at least make the attempt to compete by supporting their DRM system on Mac OS X as well as windows but MSFT is not interested in doing that.
I bought my first iPod (second generation) in 2002 which was long before iTMS came out in the US let alone when it came to Canada (where I live). I relied on CD's and eMusic to fill my iPod before iTMS was available in Canada and many of my colleagues rely on sources other than iTMS to get their music for their iPods. I use iTMS because of its large selection, the free weekly songs and the shear convenience of it.
Not iTunes the program, iTunes the music service. But nobody is forcing you to use the iTMS. You can still buy CD's and rip them yourself or buy from emusic, Magnatune or other MP3 based "legal" stores. You can also buy audio books from audible.com.
If I were to be a customer of one of MSFT's Playsforsure stores, I would not only be tied to WMP and a Playsforsure device but I would also have to run windows. The Zune is even worse because not only would I have to run Windows, use the Zune software, I'd be limited to the Zune marketplace and CD's.
But what if I want to buy music on iTMS and play that music on my Zune?
I mean, I guess that's the complaint. It doesn't seem to awful to me, but then again I wouldn't mind if Apple dropped DRM completely.
You will have the same hoops to jump through if you were to buy music from any of the Playsforsure stores and tried to play it on your Zune or if I wanted to play them on my iPod.
If you bought it for what you were hoping hackers were going to do with it, I feel you made a grave mistake. Did you not consider an iPod because you hate all things Apple? Were you trying to be anti-establishment by buying something that was not popular?
Jobs: Well iPhone does not have a keyboard and contact books are hard in other phones. Anybody: Well are you retarded? Anybody can use contact book in a phone and call somebody and keyboards are nice for inputting text. Are you retarded? Have you tried using some of the phones out there? I bought a Samsung today to hold me over but the default menu requires several levels to go through to get to contacts. It is not as easy as you make it sound. If there is faster way to get to contacts, it is not obvious to me right now.
As for a keyboard, adding a physical keyboard would defeat the purpose of a the touch screen interface and either add bulk to the device or reduce the size of the screen. I think you are simply afraid of trying knew things.
I see people harping on about 3G. Sorry but it is a phone. If you want data access, go to a free WiFi access point at a Coffee shop.
This isn't really the same thing though. Most businesses standardize on given hardware or hardware vendors, but they can easily change that vendor in the future without any problems, based upon who provides the best bid in future. That may be theoretically possible but it almost never happens. It is a scenario used by IT in order to block companies from switching to Apple. If the won contracts in the educational sector are any indication, Apple is capable of bidding competitively with other companies. It also indicates that Apple is willing to provide bulk discounts for larger customers. The fact of the matter is that right now, most business are locked into a single vendor for operating systems.
Nobody is suggesting that companies which wholesale to OS X but this excuse IT departments have is bullshit when you consider that it is being used to maintain a monopoly of MSFT OSes. If you were to ask a business user if they cared who the hardware vendor was, they would probably say no. What they really would like is stability and security with minimum down time. I think it is time for IT to stop serving its own interests at the expense of business needs. Ultimately, a choice of vendors is an IT consideration and it does not really ad to the costs in the grand scheme of things to standardize on Apple hardware if it means that support staff can be reduced as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, at times when I have had a gf, I would spend at least that much. Consider that dinner for two at a nice restaurant can run you close to 40 bucks, then add drinks, club cover charges and you get up to 78 bucks pretty quickly.
The problem is: When do you simply accept a differing viewpoint and when do you call someone out on something you know to be wrong?
There is no right or wrong when it comes to subjective things like this. None of us have yet seen iLife 07 or Leopard yet and I personally found value in Tiger enough to upgrade to it on my old mac before I sold it and bought a MBP.There, now the opinion is more realistic. Not really, that is just your opinion. I've got no problem with you having a differing opinion. What I do have a problem with is you being a prick about it and not being willing to accept a differing viewpoint at face value.
No but I smell a paid troll named Veinor. iLife is cheap for what you get with it. You see, some of us used to be poor geeks but we got off our ass and got a real job and a life. Maybe your should get off your ass and do the same. iLife is $79.00 USD with free shipping. That is about the same as a night out with the gf. I would not even miss that money.
If you going to get a Blackberry then get one and shut the hell up.
There is a huge difference between coding games for multiple platforms and encoding music in a file format that multiple media players can read. Microsoft released WMA and WMV for a wide array of audio and audio/video players. Why can't Apple? The difference is that unlike consoles, most songs are available on all stores. You are not forced to choose based on the content available. The only people without a choice are mac users but that is not the fault of Apple. MSFT chose to discontinue the development of WMP and they never intended on bring store and DRM support to Mac OS X.
Apple does not have to license if they do not want to. You are free to choose either an iPod, a Playsforsure device or a Zune if you are a windows user as Microsoft chose to lock out Mac users from the market. This lockout is part of the impetuous to the creation of the iPod in the first place. Apple wanted to provide its mac users with mac os alternative to the window only window media ecosystem. I think MSFT was foolish for not trying to maximize their potential market in the first place.
I don't think you get that Apple makes most of it's music profit on iPod sales rather than music. They knew from the start that it would take a long time for sale of music to brake even let alone show a profit. For this reason, they do not have an incentive to license to others. MSFT is about long term profits and domination while Apple is interested in creating useful products and making a nice profit on them.
In the same way, burning and re-ripping iTMS songs will provide you access to your songs regardless of platform for the purposes of fair use. Alternatively, mac users can use their iLife apps to obtain digital copies of their purchased songs without DRM for the purposes of fair use and they can also incorporate the songs in their personal home media projects.
Neither the PlaysorSure or Zune ecosystem allows for exercising of fair use rights by any other means than by burning and re-ripping the songs from an audio CD.
Serious, if you have time to read on the toilet, maybe you should consider adding some bran fiber to your diet.
You're completely ignorant of the problems of implementing DRM.
If you don't control the software all the way down to the hardware level, your DRM will be hacked 100 times faster. Yet Apple is willing to live with that. They know that any DRM will eventually be cracked anyway and so they will make their best effort without going to the extreme of trying to control the entire stack even on the platform they own. I what your suggesting is poor excuse given that even MSFT's DRM on windows has already been cracked.
Apple does not force anyone to use iTMS. I bought my first iPod long before there was an iTMS anywhere let alone in my country (Canada). I was attracted to the device because it was well supported on the mac and because I found it to be the easiest to use. Guess where I got my music? CD's, eMusic and other sources.
Why are you having such a problem with understanding that I do not want to run windows? There is no way for me to access MTP based players on any other platform. All playsforsure devices use MTP rather than acting as a mass storage device IIRC.
I do not have to use iTMS with my iPod but I choose to because I find it convienient. I have also bought audio books from audible.com (a company separate from Apple) and they work fine in iTunes and the iPod. If I was so inclined, I could use a number of different applications on windows, OS X or linux to manage my non-DRM'ed MP3s and AAC files but again I prefer iTunes.
You do not seem to get that the iPod is not tied to one platform, that iTunes not tied to one platform either and that you do not need to use iTMS if you don't want to and you can simply manage Mp3 with your iPod or other supported devices.
Most consumers are not concerned in the least. They really don't care and are perfectly happy with the iPod and iTMS. It is only geeks that make a big deal out of it because they want to use the most geeky gadget with the most complex UI they can find.
I'm so sick of hearing the same FUD over again over again. License WMA/DRM from MSFT? Please. How Apple does violate antitrust laws? Apple made the iPod, they made the ITMS. They own both products. I do not see how this is similar at all to how MSFT tried to control a platform (PCs) that it did not manufacture, design or even sell. MSFT tried to block competing software from running on OEM machines that they did not own. There is a thriving third-party addon industry surrounding the iPod and Creative has become an official licensee for accessories.
Who cares about inferior portable players? I define inferiority based on a lack of usability in the default configuration, not how many features it has. I care about my lack of platform close when it comes to WMP. It only works on windows. iTunes is cross platform compatible while WMP is not.
I bought my first iPod (second generation) in 2002 which was long before iTMS came out in the US let alone when it came to Canada (where I live). I relied on CD's and eMusic to fill my iPod before iTMS was available in Canada and many of my colleagues rely on sources other than iTMS to get their music for their iPods. I use iTMS because of its large selection, the free weekly songs and the shear convenience of it.
Fine, then rip them as WAV/AIFF and convert them to FLAC if your other player supports it.
If I were to be a customer of one of MSFT's Playsforsure stores, I would not only be tied to WMP and a Playsforsure device but I would also have to run windows. The Zune is even worse because not only would I have to run Windows, use the Zune software, I'd be limited to the Zune marketplace and CD's.
But what if I want to buy music on iTMS and play that music on my Zune?
I mean, I guess that's the complaint. It doesn't seem to awful to me, but then again I wouldn't mind if Apple dropped DRM completely.
You will have the same hoops to jump through if you were to buy music from any of the Playsforsure stores and tried to play it on your Zune or if I wanted to play them on my iPod.Have fun with your huge data transfer bills. There is no such thing as an unlimited data plan.
If you bought it for what you were hoping hackers were going to do with it, I feel you made a grave mistake. Did you not consider an iPod because you hate all things Apple? Were you trying to be anti-establishment by buying something that was not popular?
Anybody: Well are you retarded? Anybody can use contact book in a phone and call somebody and keyboards are nice for inputting text. Are you retarded? Have you tried using some of the phones out there? I bought a Samsung today to hold me over but the default menu requires several levels to go through to get to contacts. It is not as easy as you make it sound. If there is faster way to get to contacts, it is not obvious to me right now.
As for a keyboard, adding a physical keyboard would defeat the purpose of a the touch screen interface and either add bulk to the device or reduce the size of the screen. I think you are simply afraid of trying knew things.
I see people harping on about 3G. Sorry but it is a phone. If you want data access, go to a free WiFi access point at a Coffee shop.
I was quoting history for crying out loud. I did not insult the parent poster or make any inflammatory statements.
Nobody is suggesting that companies which wholesale to OS X but this excuse IT departments have is bullshit when you consider that it is being used to maintain a monopoly of MSFT OSes. If you were to ask a business user if they cared who the hardware vendor was, they would probably say no. What they really would like is stability and security with minimum down time. I think it is time for IT to stop serving its own interests at the expense of business needs. Ultimately, a choice of vendors is an IT consideration and it does not really ad to the costs in the grand scheme of things to standardize on Apple hardware if it means that support staff can be reduced as well.