Okay, I guess I was a little harsh there. When thinking open-mindedly now, I guess I can see that it wouldn't be a whole lot of trouble to do that kind of thing, so I hope somebody does come up with something that works for you.
It seems like I learned a long time ago that if you ZIP/RAR/etc a WAV or AIFF, you get a file not much bigger than the associated MP3. Is that close to true? I don't have a large music WAV right now to test with.
I don't know about Atheros, but ever since my 2-floors-down-neighbor put up a D-link "b" access point, I can't connect to my bedroom (g) access point from my own living room, even though I've separated the channels (2 and 11). I am forced to connect to his.
Does anybody test for interference with these damn things?
You are right that the poster used "begs the question" improperly, but I believe what the poster meant was that this article "raises the question," (as your linked article suggested) instead of "answers " it.
The answer would probably be "both." Most cable networks have a Pacific feed that runs three hours behind the regular feed. That's why a lot of them say in their promos "Tonight, at 8 Eastern and Pacific."
I've found a couple of good artists from there. Same basic layout as the original MP3.com, which I agree has gone farther down the tubes than last week's bad burrito.
From your article: ...``What would happen if everybody did this?"
Are you very familiar with Immanuel Kant's philosophy? I like his Universal Law Formation of the Categorical Imperative, the principle you refer to there.
I understand your point, but my problem is, IT is the only field in which I have any level of talent, and which I could see myself doing. But on the other hand, the whole reason I'm in college in the first place is I don't want to be poor, unemployed, and/or unhappy my whole life. It makes the decision very hard. I think I'd rather be well-off with a job that wasn't quite what I wanted, than be poor and unemployed with a worthless CIS degree hanging over my dining room TV-tray (which is my current fear).
Oh please. 160k MP3/128k AAC is just fine. I don't want to pay more just to please the ears of the 1% of people who can tell the difference. "Lossless" compression would require a lot more bandwidth (primary concern) as well as storage, so they will want to charge more for it. However, all of these online music stores know that there is not enough of a market for it (Sorry, you and your 3 friends with $10k stereos do not constitute a market). So keep getting your music at the record store and the rest of us will have fun downloading our "lossy" MP3s.
I'm not going to try to argue against that, because it's pretty logical and I guess you're right, but...this sucks. Time to drop my CIS major. How about... Marketing?
> when I tell friends who really owns T-Mobile, more than one has decided they'd like to go with a domestic provider, even if it's not my employer.
What's wrong with a German-owned wireless company? If there was any other provider in the US besides VZW who had acceptable coverage levels, I would consider going with T-Mobile just as much as with another carrier (except Satan's-spawn Cingular, which has earned "Most Unfavored Carrier" status in my opinion, for its abysmal network).
Besides, VZW is 44.3% owned by Vodafone, which is incorporated in the UK.
I guess my point is, how is doing business with a your average American company more desirable than with a your average German company? If either company can be proven "evil" somehow, then that taints the equation totally, but if neither is particularly bad, what's the problem? I mean, judging from the take on the current German economy from the posts in this thread, they need the business a lot more than our fat CEOs need another bonus check.
1. Ok. And if that bothers you that much (even though in my book it's comaring Apple iPods to oranges since it's not really a peripheral in its primary use), then it must not be for you. No problems. As for me, and many others, I'd never buy a PC that cheap. iPods are definitely targeted at people with good computers (heck, many "$300" computers don't have USB2.0 or FireWire built in). People with bottom-of-the-line bargain basement PC's probably want the various $50 32MB flash MP3 players because clearly they've made a decision to save money instead of buying top-quality technology products. They also tend to have dial-up which lessens the likelyhood that they have many GB of MP3's.
2. I didn't mean to say it's unbreakable. But it's not fragile. I've dropped mine several times. I did have a minor problem early on with mine (this was also before I'd really dropped it at all) and Apple took it and fixed it and overnighted it back all in less than a week. and it's been fine since. It's got a warranty, and when that runs out, put it on your homeowner's insurance or the excellent Safeware policy.
> what college [do] you go to where you see so many kids walking around with $300 MP3 players?
I go to San Francisco State University, an urban public university that describes itself as having undergraduate fees that "are still the lowest in the nation when compared with similar public higher education institutions." In other words, like most of the second-tier California State University system, SFSU is a school with a large majority of students from California working-class and low-income families. Having spent about 1.5 years here, I can confidently say that the "obscenely rich" make up a tiny, tiny portion of the students on this campus.
> Do these kids drive $20,000 cars to school as well? Actually, many do. Now I have absolutely no idea how they afford those. And we have lots of these Asian guys with these little Hondas with all the extensive racing mods and those huge spoilers. They must work, a lot.
Anyway, though, my point was that $300 isn't that much money. Really, it's not. My roommate spent that much on a video card and 3D games in the last year. The iPod is no different--it's the best player, so if you like music, you make sacrifices and get one. For me, it was bought on my American Express card and ultimately paid for with Financial Aid money. I don't even have a job. I also don't have a car, which saves me thousands every year.
Lots of college students own things that cost more than $300. Car payments/insurance, insane video cards and gaming consoles/software, and designer clothes are a much bigger expense for most students than an iPod would be.
Oh, and while we're talking college, iPods start at $269 at the Apple Store for Education (telesales and Web), and at the Apple campus resellers located on most college campuses. So that's the price that should be compared when you're talking about the college MP3-player market.
> Again, the iPod is merely an item for those who can afford to drop $300 on a MP3 player...
And again, without any offense intended toward anyone, all these cheap imitations are merely items for those who can't. Neither of these statements are very informational, and the cost issue doesn't have any bearing on whether you should buy an iPod. If you can't afford one, you can't buy one. If you can afford one, then in my opinion is it's worth your money.
Well, my point is, it wasn't designed for hifi recording. It's not really targeted at audio professionals, the kind of people who would need that. It's primarily an MP3/AAC player, and it does that well. I don't want them to add S/PDIF-in and the associated software for recording, because that would jack up the price for the 99% who could care less about recording, they just want a high-quality MP3 player. I stand by my statement that recording is better done with another device. They want to "replace DAT decks" with an iPod? I'll bet DAT decks cost a lot of money (i.e. more than an iPod), so it's reasonable to pay the same for a replacement, instead of expecting a consumer MP3 product to replace them.
Here's a better analogy: A doctor expecting his next laptop to replace the $10000 heart monitors in the operating room. Only doctors would want that; and it would make laptops cost $10000, so the doctor isn't going to get his heart monitor built into a consumer laptop. There isn't enough market for it to support the higher prices.
I see. You are correct that some of the WMA stores offer similar terms to iTMS. I meant to suggest that some of the WMA stores, especially ones that have been around for a little while, aren't as lenient, but I couldn't tell you which ones because I never bother with them (and besides, if they don't support Mac OS X or Linux they're not worth my time).
1. A shitty PC. And you can't carry it with you and listen to MP3s. So what's your point?
2. I'll believe this when I have any problems with my iPod.
3. Like I said, I've used several MP3CDs, and they're crap in my opinion, and not at all of good quality. They waste your time deciding which 700MB of your music collection to burn. They don't give you playlist creating and editing functionality.
4. I would. I don't use my Palm anymore because it's one more item to carry (whereas I always have my iPod on me) and I seldom need write access to my appointments while I'm away from my PowerBook. My T720c cellphone (like all cellphones) has a crappy interface for entering and viewing calendars, and it's a pain to enter contact information like street addresses and e-mails in it. My iPod grabs all this information from the address book and calendar program I already use on my computer. And "corporate business"? I didn't know the iPod was targeted at people in suits. I thought it was targeted heavily at college students and others in the 18-25 demographic. I know I see plenty of students at my building and at my school with iPods, so don't tell me it's too expensive for students.
> a light version, with say a SD card slot, and does nothing but music for maybe $150
Flash-based players--Not interested. I want to fit a whole bunch of music (read more than several GB, so Flash is out) on a media that's random-accessable (so CD-MP3's are out) so that when I download a new tune, I can load it onto my iPod in 2 seconds and go out the door. I don't ever want to buy expensive media in the conceivable future (i.e. no SD/etc), and I don't want to spend any time--ever--deciding which music to take with me (so CD-MP3's are out again. I value my time more than saving a few bucks on an MP3 player). I want to say "Gee, I wish I could hear this song I haven't thought about in a year" and bring it up on the player in 5 seconds--when I'm out walking around. You can't do that with CD-MP3's unless you carry stacks of CDs around--the main reason I wanted to switch to Mp3 in the first place. I also want a player that fits in any pocket I can try to stick it in. I mean, my iPod fits in the cellphone pocket of my jacket. CD-MP3 players are huge in comparison.
In conclusion, while I did have a CD-MP3 for almost a year, and it was a little better than a regular CD Walkman, it was only a temporary solution for those too poor, or too lazy to save up the money, for an iPod. It's not a replacement, and anyone who tells you it is, is someone who's never had an iPod.
I will preface this with "This is only opinion," but streaming is overrated (And not terribly relevant to the portable MP3 discussion).
The iTunes program gives you decent Internet radio for free, which I understand is not the same as the on-demand streaming, but it's decent.
And if, as an iPod user who enjoys the streaming stuff too, you want to subscribe to Napster or MusicMatch's streaming service, then go ahead. You can still get your downloadable music from ITMS. Because if I understand it correctly, most of the WMA stores still charge you $1 for downloaded, burnable/portable tracks, whether or not you subscribe to streaming. Someone please educate me if I'm wrong.
I agree. The article reeks of the same FUD Microsoft was throwing the day of the ITMS/Win launch. The article basically parallels with: "Don't buy a Mercedes. They're too expensive, they don't come with a winch for all your archaeological missions, and you can't put the cheapest grade of gas in it."
To counter: 1. Six-plus hours of battery life is not always enough. A: For some. This is the most valid excuse. I would just plug mine into my PowerBook for some of that time, (or listen to the PB itself) but that's because I don't use the latter on the plane very much. I can understand how some have this battery problem. I would maybe suggest the old iPods, which IIRC got closer to 8hrs in their larger-sized case.
2. Jogging with a hard drive-based player is not cool. A: Never had any problem running with my 10GB iPod. And if "Some experts say that it's impossible to damage the drive in this way," just believe them and go jogging already.
3. The iPod is expensive. A: Oh please. I got mine for $239. The best $239 I've ever spent. I never leave the apartment without it. I never carry my CD-wallet around. Amortize it over the next year if you want to. If you get a the 10GB $299 model that I got, that's $0.82 a day for a year, and after that it's yours to keep. And they laser-engrave now for free. That looks cool.
And the suggestion here: CD-MP3 players! HA! I used two models of those and they are worthless. You have to burn mixes, just like regular CD mixes, but these mixes have to be about 20 hours long or you're wasting your time and CD. Sure they're under $50 now, because no one would pay more than that for 'em.
This is not a cheap player, people. This is a good thing. It's part of why it doesn't suck, because they don't have to make it from cheap Chinese plastic and a 2-line screen to make it under $50 retail.
4. You want to make high-quality digital recordings. A: Give me another "Oh please." If you want to make hi-fi digital recordings with your portable MP3 player, that's like saying "I want to win a demolition derby in my new Toyota Prius Hybrid. The Prius is cool for a totally different application--driving efficiently on streets. The iPod is not targeted at DJs who need to record things. It is used by many DJs who want to use it to play songs at events, though, and if it were busy playing, how could any MP3 player record? Maybe just buy one of these "recording" MP3 units as your recording box, and use the iPod for playing and for personal recreational listening. But I'd hang on to your current recording gear if I were you. MP3 players, as a general rule, just aren't for that, and I doubt they'll do a good job.
Oh, and I don't care and 99.4% of people don't care about that either. Talk about a niche. More like a super-niche. And we don't want a more expensive MP3 player (or one with cheaper hardware to make up for it) to pay for your silly recording capability. So don't push for this.
5. You want a choice in online music stores. A: Microsoft FUD. Choice? Please. You do have a choice. Good quality, legal AAC's, or good quality, legal AAC's/MP3's from your own CDs. Or un-legit MP3's too. That's way good enough for me. WMA stores are inadequate. The DRM is stifling at many. Why mess with a good thing?
Oh, and can you sync your calendar, address book with your Dell or Samsung MP3 players (or laughable CD-MP3 units)? Oh what? It doesn't even do that? How unfortunate for you.
Everyone here is forgetting what clueless idiots 95% of Kazaa users are. They have no idea what is going on with the RIAA, and would not be surprised if the police came and arrested them for "stealing music." They don't understand the difference between a civil suit and a criminal charge, and they don't understand that there are varying shades of legality with this.
Most users (think about the 30 million AOL users) think that downloading any MP3's (even if you own the CD) is a criminal offense, and that the files on their hard drive are proof of this crime. A good portion probably think that ripping your CD's is also a crime. This adds up to many users being afraid of being "caught." They are afraid that they can be "detected," even if the files aren't being shared; many probably fear that their "illegal" MP3's could somehow be detected even when the computer is off!
For you and me, to feel 100% safe, all that is necessary is to make sure no copyrighted files are being shared for anonymous download, but to a clueless user, they think the only way to be safe is to delete all their music files.
FUD and propaganda aside, I personally don't doubt that statistic. I know someone who did delete all her music out of RIAA-inspired FUD.
And now, something to consider: With all the scorn for the Constitution and friends in high places for which the RIAA has become infamous, how long do you think it will be before they start obtaining search warrants just like they now obtain subpoenae? Then the RIAA would be able to come to your house, demand entry, and scan your hard drive for copyrighted MP3's. In that case, deleting them would be your only 100% safe solution. That time has not come yet, but it will someday, and I'm sure some users are cowering in front of their computers right now fearing that will happen to them today.
Slashdot Mirror
Cool. I was just curious because your post made me think "I know that! I learned that in Philosophy 110!"
Okay, I guess I was a little harsh there. When thinking open-mindedly now, I guess I can see that it wouldn't be a whole lot of trouble to do that kind of thing, so I hope somebody does come up with something that works for you.
It seems like I learned a long time ago that if you ZIP/RAR/etc a WAV or AIFF, you get a file not much bigger than the associated MP3. Is that close to true? I don't have a large music WAV right now to test with.
I don't know about Atheros, but ever since my 2-floors-down-neighbor put up a D-link "b" access point, I can't connect to my bedroom (g) access point from my own living room, even though I've separated the channels (2 and 11). I am forced to connect to his.
Does anybody test for interference with these damn things?
You are right that the poster used "begs the question" improperly, but I believe what the poster meant was that this article "raises the question," (as your linked article suggested) instead of "answers " it.
The answer would probably be "both." Most cable networks have a Pacific feed that runs three hours behind the regular feed. That's why a lot of them say in their promos "Tonight, at 8 Eastern and Pacific."
I like Epitonic.com.
I've found a couple of good artists from there. Same basic layout as the original MP3.com, which I agree has gone farther down the tubes than last week's bad burrito.
But yeah, Epitonic's worth a try.
From your article: ...``What would happen if everybody did this?"
Are you very familiar with Immanuel Kant's philosophy? I like his Universal Law Formation of the Categorical Imperative, the principle you refer to there.
Good article.
I understand your point, but my problem is, IT is the only field in which I have any level of talent, and which I could see myself doing. But on the other hand, the whole reason I'm in college in the first place is I don't want to be poor, unemployed, and/or unhappy my whole life. It makes the decision very hard. I think I'd rather be well-off with a job that wasn't quite what I wanted, than be poor and unemployed with a worthless CIS degree hanging over my dining room TV-tray (which is my current fear).
Thanks for the support though.
> "9.0" -- ... the worst name ever
I'm pretty sure the full name of the product is "AOL 9.0" or maybe "AOL 9.0 Optimized."
This doesn't seem to me a particularly worse name than "AOL 8.0" or "AOL 7.0."
I explored a handy method for doing this in this journal entry.
Just me doing it probably doesn't help anything, but it sure makes me feel good.
I'll second that. I love Spam the Meat!!
/me goes off to eat some bacon
Spammers and such should campaign to get their spam/spim retitled "bacon." Who wouldn't love to get lots of "bacon" in their inbox?
It'd be more humorous, too: "Bacon filters" "Bacon Assassin" "Fax Bacon" "BacIM" "Bacon Complaints"
Oh please. 160k MP3/128k AAC is just fine. I don't want to pay more just to please the ears of the 1% of people who can tell the difference. "Lossless" compression would require a lot more bandwidth (primary concern) as well as storage, so they will want to charge more for it. However, all of these online music stores know that there is not enough of a market for it (Sorry, you and your 3 friends with $10k stereos do not constitute a market). So keep getting your music at the record store and the rest of us will have fun downloading our "lossy" MP3s.
I'm not going to try to argue against that, because it's pretty logical and I guess you're right, but...this sucks. Time to drop my CIS major. How about... Marketing?
> when I tell friends who really owns T-Mobile, more than one has decided they'd like to go with a domestic provider, even if it's not my employer.
What's wrong with a German-owned wireless company? If there was any other provider in the US besides VZW who had acceptable coverage levels, I would consider going with T-Mobile just as much as with another carrier (except Satan's-spawn Cingular, which has earned "Most Unfavored Carrier" status in my opinion, for its abysmal network).
Besides, VZW is 44.3% owned by Vodafone, which is incorporated in the UK.
I guess my point is, how is doing business with a your average American company more desirable than with a your average German company? If either company can be proven "evil" somehow, then that taints the equation totally, but if neither is particularly bad, what's the problem? I mean, judging from the take on the current German economy from the posts in this thread, they need the business a lot more than our fat CEOs need another bonus check.
1. Ok. And if that bothers you that much (even though in my book it's comaring Apple iPods to oranges since it's not really a peripheral in its primary use), then it must not be for you. No problems. As for me, and many others, I'd never buy a PC that cheap. iPods are definitely targeted at people with good computers (heck, many "$300" computers don't have USB2.0 or FireWire built in). People with bottom-of-the-line bargain basement PC's probably want the various $50 32MB flash MP3 players because clearly they've made a decision to save money instead of buying top-quality technology products. They also tend to have dial-up which lessens the likelyhood that they have many GB of MP3's.
2. I didn't mean to say it's unbreakable. But it's not fragile. I've dropped mine several times. I did have a minor problem early on with mine (this was also before I'd really dropped it at all) and Apple took it and fixed it and overnighted it back all in less than a week. and it's been fine since. It's got a warranty, and when that runs out, put it on your homeowner's insurance or the excellent Safeware policy.
> what college [do] you go to where you see so many kids walking around with $300 MP3 players?
I go to San Francisco State University, an urban public university that describes itself as having undergraduate fees that "are still the lowest in the nation when compared with similar public higher education institutions." In other words, like most of the second-tier California State University system, SFSU is a school with a large majority of students from California working-class and low-income families. Having spent about 1.5 years here, I can confidently say that the "obscenely rich" make up a tiny, tiny portion of the students on this campus.
> Do these kids drive $20,000 cars to school as well?
Actually, many do. Now I have absolutely no idea how they afford those. And we have lots of these Asian guys with these little Hondas with all the extensive racing mods and those huge spoilers. They must work, a lot.
Anyway, though, my point was that $300 isn't that much money. Really, it's not. My roommate spent that much on a video card and 3D games in the last year. The iPod is no different--it's the best player, so if you like music, you make sacrifices and get one. For me, it was bought on my American Express card and ultimately paid for with Financial Aid money. I don't even have a job. I also don't have a car, which saves me thousands every year.
Lots of college students own things that cost more than $300. Car payments/insurance, insane video cards and gaming consoles/software, and designer clothes are a much bigger expense for most students than an iPod would be.
Oh, and while we're talking college, iPods start at $269 at the Apple Store for Education (telesales and Web), and at the Apple campus resellers located on most college campuses. So that's the price that should be compared when you're talking about the college MP3-player market.
> Again, the iPod is merely an item for those who can afford to drop $300 on a MP3 player...
And again, without any offense intended toward anyone, all these cheap imitations are merely items for those who can't. Neither of these statements are very informational, and the cost issue doesn't have any bearing on whether you should buy an iPod. If you can't afford one, you can't buy one. If you can afford one, then in my opinion is it's worth your money.
Well, my point is, it wasn't designed for hifi recording. It's not really targeted at audio professionals, the kind of people who would need that. It's primarily an MP3/AAC player, and it does that well. I don't want them to add S/PDIF-in and the associated software for recording, because that would jack up the price for the 99% who could care less about recording, they just want a high-quality MP3 player. I stand by my statement that recording is better done with another device. They want to "replace DAT decks" with an iPod? I'll bet DAT decks cost a lot of money (i.e. more than an iPod), so it's reasonable to pay the same for a replacement, instead of expecting a consumer MP3 product to replace them.
Here's a better analogy: A doctor expecting his next laptop to replace the $10000 heart monitors in the operating room. Only doctors would want that; and it would make laptops cost $10000, so the doctor isn't going to get his heart monitor built into a consumer laptop. There isn't enough market for it to support the higher prices.
I see. You are correct that some of the WMA stores offer similar terms to iTMS. I meant to suggest that some of the WMA stores, especially ones that have been around for a little while, aren't as lenient, but I couldn't tell you which ones because I never bother with them (and besides, if they don't support Mac OS X or Linux they're not worth my time).
So I do see your point though.
1. A shitty PC. And you can't carry it with you and listen to MP3s. So what's your point?
2. I'll believe this when I have any problems with my iPod.
3. Like I said, I've used several MP3CDs, and they're crap in my opinion, and not at all of good quality. They waste your time deciding which 700MB of your music collection to burn. They don't give you playlist creating and editing functionality.
4. I would. I don't use my Palm anymore because it's one more item to carry (whereas I always have my iPod on me) and I seldom need write access to my appointments while I'm away from my PowerBook. My T720c cellphone (like all cellphones) has a crappy interface for entering and viewing calendars, and it's a pain to enter contact information like street addresses and e-mails in it. My iPod grabs all this information from the address book and calendar program I already use on my computer. And "corporate business"? I didn't know the iPod was targeted at people in suits. I thought it was targeted heavily at college students and others in the 18-25 demographic. I know I see plenty of students at my building and at my school with iPods, so don't tell me it's too expensive for students.
> a light version, with say a SD card slot, and does nothing but music for maybe $150
Flash-based players--Not interested. I want to fit a whole bunch of music (read more than several GB, so Flash is out) on a media that's random-accessable (so CD-MP3's are out) so that when I download a new tune, I can load it onto my iPod in 2 seconds and go out the door. I don't ever want to buy expensive media in the conceivable future (i.e. no SD/etc), and I don't want to spend any time--ever--deciding which music to take with me (so CD-MP3's are out again. I value my time more than saving a few bucks on an MP3 player). I want to say "Gee, I wish I could hear this song I haven't thought about in a year" and bring it up on the player in 5 seconds--when I'm out walking around. You can't do that with CD-MP3's unless you carry stacks of CDs around--the main reason I wanted to switch to Mp3 in the first place. I also want a player that fits in any pocket I can try to stick it in. I mean, my iPod fits in the cellphone pocket of my jacket. CD-MP3 players are huge in comparison.
In conclusion, while I did have a CD-MP3 for almost a year, and it was a little better than a regular CD Walkman, it was only a temporary solution for those too poor, or too lazy to save up the money, for an iPod. It's not a replacement, and anyone who tells you it is, is someone who's never had an iPod.
I will preface this with "This is only opinion," but streaming is overrated (And not terribly relevant to the portable MP3 discussion).
The iTunes program gives you decent Internet radio for free, which I understand is not the same as the on-demand streaming, but it's decent.
And if, as an iPod user who enjoys the streaming stuff too, you want to subscribe to Napster or MusicMatch's streaming service, then go ahead. You can still get your downloadable music from ITMS. Because if I understand it correctly, most of the WMA stores still charge you $1 for downloaded, burnable/portable tracks, whether or not you subscribe to streaming. Someone please educate me if I'm wrong.
Yes, I'd consider it Flamebait if the reasons were stupid like this one.
I agree. The article reeks of the same FUD Microsoft was throwing the day of the ITMS/Win launch. The article basically parallels with: "Don't buy a Mercedes. They're too expensive, they don't come with a winch for all your archaeological missions, and you can't put the cheapest grade of gas in it."
To counter:
1. Six-plus hours of battery life is not always enough.
A: For some. This is the most valid excuse. I would just plug mine into my PowerBook for some of that time, (or listen to the PB itself) but that's because I don't use the latter on the plane very much. I can understand how some have this battery problem. I would maybe suggest the old iPods, which IIRC got closer to 8hrs in their larger-sized case.
2. Jogging with a hard drive-based player is not cool.
A: Never had any problem running with my 10GB iPod. And if "Some experts say that it's impossible to damage the drive in this way," just believe them and go jogging already.
3. The iPod is expensive.
A: Oh please. I got mine for $239. The best $239 I've ever spent. I never leave the apartment without it. I never carry my CD-wallet around. Amortize it over the next year if you want to. If you get a the 10GB $299 model that I got, that's $0.82 a day for a year, and after that it's yours to keep. And they laser-engrave now for free. That looks cool.
And the suggestion here: CD-MP3 players! HA! I used two models of those and they are worthless. You have to burn mixes, just like regular CD mixes, but these mixes have to be about 20 hours long or you're wasting your time and CD. Sure they're under $50 now, because no one would pay more than that for 'em.
This is not a cheap player, people. This is a good thing. It's part of why it doesn't suck, because they don't have to make it from cheap Chinese plastic and a 2-line screen to make it under $50 retail.
4. You want to make high-quality digital recordings.
A: Give me another "Oh please." If you want to make hi-fi digital recordings with your portable MP3 player, that's like saying "I want to win a demolition derby in my new Toyota Prius Hybrid. The Prius is cool for a totally different application--driving efficiently on streets. The iPod is not targeted at DJs who need to record things. It is used by many DJs who want to use it to play songs at events, though, and if it were busy playing, how could any MP3 player record? Maybe just buy one of these "recording" MP3 units as your recording box, and use the iPod for playing and for personal recreational listening. But I'd hang on to your current recording gear if I were you. MP3 players, as a general rule, just aren't for that, and I doubt they'll do a good job.
Oh, and I don't care and 99.4% of people don't care about that either. Talk about a niche. More like a super-niche. And we don't want a more expensive MP3 player (or one with cheaper hardware to make up for it) to pay for your silly recording capability. So don't push for this.
5. You want a choice in online music stores.
A: Microsoft FUD. Choice? Please. You do have a choice. Good quality, legal AAC's, or good quality, legal AAC's/MP3's from your own CDs. Or un-legit MP3's too. That's way good enough for me. WMA stores are inadequate. The DRM is stifling at many. Why mess with a good thing?
Oh, and can you sync your calendar, address book with your Dell or Samsung MP3 players (or laughable CD-MP3 units)? Oh what? It doesn't even do that? How unfortunate for you.
This is exactly what I thought. Awesome.
Everyone here is forgetting what clueless idiots 95% of Kazaa users are. They have no idea what is going on with the RIAA, and would not be surprised if the police came and arrested them for "stealing music." They don't understand the difference between a civil suit and a criminal charge, and they don't understand that there are varying shades of legality with this.
Most users (think about the 30 million AOL users) think that downloading any MP3's (even if you own the CD) is a criminal offense, and that the files on their hard drive are proof of this crime. A good portion probably think that ripping your CD's is also a crime. This adds up to many users being afraid of being "caught." They are afraid that they can be "detected," even if the files aren't being shared; many probably fear that their "illegal" MP3's could somehow be detected even when the computer is off!
For you and me, to feel 100% safe, all that is necessary is to make sure no copyrighted files are being shared for anonymous download, but to a clueless user, they think the only way to be safe is to delete all their music files.
FUD and propaganda aside, I personally don't doubt that statistic. I know someone who did delete all her music out of RIAA-inspired FUD.
And now, something to consider: With all the scorn for the Constitution and friends in high places for which the RIAA has become infamous, how long do you think it will be before they start obtaining search warrants just like they now obtain subpoenae? Then the RIAA would be able to come to your house, demand entry, and scan your hard drive for copyrighted MP3's. In that case, deleting them would be your only 100% safe solution. That time has not come yet, but it will someday, and I'm sure some users are cowering in front of their computers right now fearing that will happen to them today.
> butterfly butterfly butterfly etc.
Butterfly. MSN. Hotmail. Heh.
> yes, I will try cracking the passwords myself,
Are you sure that's not a DMCA violation?