"People chose the GPL because it would grant them some rights and believing it would protect them against, tivo subverted the license to things that the original developers didn't want them to do. This is the treason, it might be completely legal but it is unethical and a treason to the people who had putted their sweat into the kernel and did not wish for this to happen."
If that was their belief then it's they're own failure. They dictated the license when they released their code, so if they insist on blaming someone rather than themselves, then they should point the finger at RMS. The GPL has no authority over anything unrelated to what it is licensing. Just because the developers were naive doesn't mean there was any "treason".
"This is clear a case, and in this case is not even a case of misunderstanding on the part of tivo, it is very clear that people wish to grant power to modify and run them when code is licensed with GPL, no one has any doubt in that (unless you're a tivo lawyer)."
Sorry, but you just don't get it. The Tivo hardware is not covered in any way by the GPL and there is no ambiguity in any language. Tivo granted the right to users to modify its code and use it in the manner than the GPL grants. The hardware they sell you is not governed by the GPL, however, and they are under no obligation to make the hardware compatible with the license. RMS understands that, Linus understands it, Tivo understands it, why can't you?
I'll say it again, words are not defined by the Congress. There are the legal meanings of words and then there are the general meanings. You would be wrong to assume that words like "crime" and "theft" are always used in their legal definitions. These words are far broader in their meaning than the legal concepts they describe.
"Gingrich sharply criticized campaign finance laws he charged were reducing free speech and doing little to fight attack advertising. He also said court rulings over separation of church and state have hurt citizens' ability to express themselves and their faith."...before I got really angry. He's positioning himself for the support of the religious right.
Anyone who needed a reason to oppose Newt for President just got it, that is unless you favor an authoritarian theocracy.
"The more popular a topic is the [more] edits it receives and the more trustworthy the information is."
I don't agree with that. Trustworthiness is more a function of how invested in the "facts" the contributors are. Where stronger emotions exist you lose trustworthiness.
WP is a great resource just so long as you don't count on it being definitive. Having millions of edits is no guarantee of accuracy.
So, if you insist on the legal definition of the word(s) then you're correct but you shouldn't assume that everyone else is using the language the same way (unless you are speaking with legal counsel). Language requires an understanding of context.
The same argument applies to the word "theft" as it applies to copyright. Those who claim that theft doesn't apply doggedly insist that the definition is strictly a legal one, i.e. larceny. The fact is, though, that "crime" and "theft" are just words and they have broader definitions that just the legal ones.
"Since it is not a criminal offense then it cannot be described as a crime (by the definition of the word)."
So now I hope you understand why this isn't true. If you had said...
"Since it is not a criminal offense then it cannot be legally described as a crime (by the legal definition of the word)."...then you would be right.
"I'm not sure what all the ranting here about RMS not having to work for a living is coming from..."
It comes from an ideology that RMS champions that strikes at the heart of virtually all programmer's livelihoods. RMS is a silver-spooner. He's never had to earn a living or worry about how he's going to eat (or how he's going to feed a family). He's totally disconnected from the real world where people work because they need to get paid. He chooses a lifestyle of homelessness (and apparently showerlessness) and, as such, has little appreciation for a more conventional lifestyle. It's easy to insist that all software be free when you're already financially set. RMS has what he *needs*; what he *wants* he doesn't want to pay for.
If you are going to respect someone's advice, it would help to know they have experience in such matters. RMS's views are extremely removed from the mainstream but so is every aspect of his life, so don't believe that his ideas have been formed with an appreciation and consideration of the average man. It's important, sometimes, to understand that.
None of this is a reason to dismiss what he says, though. RMS's fight certainly has a positive effect on our software choices. I don't believe, though, that living in an RMS software/hardware utopia would be a place I'd like to be.
People believe that the GPLv3 will cause future "Tivos" to be "free" but there's no reason to believe that. If a company does not want its product opened and the GPL ultimately forces it, the result will be that GPL software won't be used. For idealists that will be fine, but for many the increased costs, longer leadtimes, or outright lack of market choices will not please them. The greater restrictions of v3 may lead to a shrinking of contributions and usage of GPL'ed software.
"...I must disagree that Tivo did not subvert GNU/Linux to their own ends."
That implies you know the intent of the authors of the software used by Tivo. Since there are many and at least some of them (perhaps even the most important one) have publicly stated that they support Tivo's usage, I don't think you can make that case. In the end, there's only the GPLv2 license which, everyone agrees, has been respected by the company.
"They intentionally threw that roadblock in place to prevent people from doing whatever they wanted with GPL software."
No, they didn't. They threw the roadblock in place to prevent people from doing whatever they wanted with the HARDWARE.
"You do not agree that such actions are misuse, at least in conflict with the intent of the GPL?"
Yes, I don't agree. That's not to say I wouldn't want things to be different, but I respect that Tivo has done nothing wrong. If RMS chooses to pursue license changes to addrees the issue, he's free to do so. It's not clear that the effect will be positive.
"If you are suggesting that they should be permitted to misuse GPL software in that pursuit..."
Tivo didn't misuse GPL software. Even RMS recognized in the speech that Tivo was in compliance with the GPL. RMS said:
"The Tivo contains a small GNU/Linux operating system, thus, several programs under the GNU GPL. And, as far as I know, the Tivo company does obey GPL version 2. They provide the users with source code and the users can then modify it and compile it and then install it in the Tivo."
So RMS recognizes that Tivo has done nothing wrong with respect to the GPL. He continues:
"That's where the trouble begins because the Tivo will not run modified versions, the Tivo contains hardware designed to detect that the software has been changed and shuts down. So, regardless of the details of your modification, your modified version will not run in your Tivo."
Nothing in GPLv2 governs the hardware that GPL'ed software runs on, however. RMS wants to change that, but that doesn't mean that Tivo has done anything wrong.
"If Tivo doesn't like the idea of people running whatever kernel they want on their hardware, let them write their own kernel and not subvert GNU/Linux."
Tivo didn't subvert anything. They gave everyone their modifications and licensed that work for their competitors to use. What they didn't do is sell a general purpose computing device. RMS seeks to limit future GPL software to run only on a subset of hardware.
"Actually, it does. Because of iTunes' smart playlists, it means that I hardly ever have to interact with the iPod. I already have iTunes set up to select the music/podcasts I want, so I basically just press play and put it in my pocket."
Then any player that has a play button would be easy to use so long as it integrates with iTunes? I thought that iPods were easier to use because of their superior, patented scroll wheels? Not everyone uses iTunes/iPods in the same way and I'm certain it took you some work to get iTunes to manage your player in the manner you prefer.
"The quality of integration is one of the main forces behind ease-of-use, as explained above."
You are free to redefine what constitutes your portable music player in order to meet your "ease of use" perspective. For the rest of us, the player itself is what we use to listen to the music while we aren't at our computer.
"Before iTunes came to Windows, there were many competitors. But iTunes slaughtered them all, even the popular WinAmp."
I don't agree with that at all. I hated iTunes when it came to Windows. Frankly, I considered it 3rd place at best and I didn't use it at all because I had XPlay. I only use iTunes now because everyone I know uses it and it helps when people come over. iTunes is successful on Windows only because people own iPods. iTunes greatest strength, it's store integration, is useless to me because I don't buy DRM'ed music.
iTunes is a terrible performer as well. Importing songs is dog-slow and startup times for me are frequently >30 seconds. I have a large library (>15K songs, >80GB) on a current, dual core machine. Importing folders frequently results in songs getting imported multiple times and iTunes is misable at removing duplicates. Basically, iTunes is crap.
"Note that the iPod is marketed as "iPod + iTunes.""
Really? I just bought 2 iPods, a shuffle and a nano, and I'm looking at the packaging right now. Neither package says iTunes anywhere except in the requirements fine print. iTunes isn't even included in the package. So much for iPods being marketed as "iPod + iTunes". When I buy an mp3 player, I'm buying a device, not a system that is dominated by host software.
"There are plenty of commentary and reviews that discuss iTunes when discussing iPod usability - are you just ignorant of them?"
If I am, you aren't doing anything to enlighten me. As far as I'm concerned, I'm unaware of them because they don't exist.
"It may not be a part of day-to-day use, but it is definitely use."
Stick your head in the sand on that one. I'd expect nothing less. Setup is a one-time thing. That's why it's differentiated from "use".
How is this "evidenced by my language?" Care to elaborate? Setup is definitely a part of use."
No, it's not. Setup and use are different things. When you take your computer out of its box and set it on your desk, is that part of use? Of course not. You use different words to describe the process then claim they are the same thing. Setup and use are not the same.
"Is installing Windows not a part of its use?"
No, it's not. Installing Windows is not part if using Windows.
"Almost everybody would disagree if you were to say that."
Perhaps everyone here would, but that's because they perceive that position to be the "pro-Apple, pro-iPod" position to take. It doesn't matter what the argument is. That's why I get modded as troll and flamebait for making factual statements.
"So where does your thumb drive get the power to do the USB bus negotiations to turn the power on, hmm?"
The thumb drive is a standard mass storage device and the device driver is built into the operating system. No problem.
"...but there is some power there before anything happens, and that is what the USB powered speakers, fans, lights, coffee warmers, and lava lamps run off of."
But not all high power devices aren't going to be able to charge their batteries off of that.
"Also, the power negotiations happen as the USB host controler level, not at the specific driver level, so the system will negotiate the power for the default configuration of the device without any device-specific software installed."
My experience with WinXP is that that is not true. If you don't have a proper driver installed for a high power device then the device never receives the power it wants. I've had devices fail to charge for exactly that reason.
"The device's software can change to a different configuration that might use more power, but the system has to bring it up before it can know about the other configs."
And that could possibly explain it. Larger devices are unlikely to activate their charging circuits until they're getting the power they request. For whatever reason, that sometimes doesn't happen until the host software is installed properly. I've even had devices refuse to charge off a laptop when the charge fine on a desktop, and the crappy Moto RAZR won't charge at all unless it has some residual charge when you plug it in. Just because USB charging CAN be made to work doesn't mean it always works.
No doubt that users care about the entire experience and they'll be turned off by initial problems. I've never argued that the install problem isn't an issue, but the author labelled the install problem as an "ease of use" nightmare then failed to evaluate actual "ease of use".
Right, because Apple fanboys that post as AC as so knowledgable that I can learn something from them. Perhaps if they had something to contribute to the conversation besides a worn out insult...
Sorry to pee on your parade, but I don't one or desire a Zune. It's not surprising, though, that you insult the poster when you can't argue against the post. Why does it burn you so bad that someone would call a fraud a fraud?
You are entitled to fail to understand the language, No one can make you get it.
There is "setup" and "use". Installation is part of "setup", not "use". Ease of "use" is not impacted by a "setup" failure. It's as simple as that. You install a device once but you use it again and again. The hardest device in the world to install may be the easiest to use.
I see. Mac software doesn't exhibit such failures because mac users don't tolerate it, except when they happen and then they do (and in that case they don't count because they aren't mainstream). Makes sense in a fanboy sort of way.
Missing Sync is not shareware and is not restricted to Palm devices. You have to buy it because iSync doesn't actually support the wide range of devices you'd expect it would. It is a commercial mac app that fails in just the manner that was claimed mac apps never do. Sorry if that bursts your superiority bubble.
"So... since it's useless to you no one else should have it?"
Didn't say that. I said that I don't get why anyone would WANT it.
"Wireless sync is a magical wonderful thing when implemented well, as it can be on the Apple platform."
Haha. It can be on the Apple platform why? Are you saying that only Apple can do it?
"...just go about my routing of plugging it in to its charger in another room."
Wow! So the beauty of wireless sync (that you think only Apple can provide) is that it allows you to locate your charger in another room. Fantastic! I can do that with two chargers;-)
"It's an example of how technology SHOULD work -- unobtrusive and helpful. Two things Microsoft in general and it's Zune in particular are not noted for."
Hmmm. Zune has been out, what, a few days? How does that iPod ProximitySync work?
How do you think an iPod ProximitySync would work when you have configured your device for manual sync because you have a music library far larger than the iod will hold? Not so unobtrusive and helpful then, eh?
iPods self-discharge quickly because they never actually turn off. They appear to but any blank screen is indistiguishable from "off". I don't know how long the current models last on standby, but the last one I tested was a 4G and its standby time was about 36 hours. A Lithium polymer or Lithium Ion battery has a low self-discharge rate relative to the few days that iPods exhibit.
I don't count shuffles in that because they do have an on/off switch. My 2G shuffle battery hasn't run dead yet.
"An iPod will charge over USB without any software installed."
On a mac or a PC? The USB protocol requires that the device specify the power it requires before the power is supplied. Without a driver, USB power might not be applied. Perhaps the iPod doesn't suffer this problem but that doesn't mean the Zune doesn't;-)
Regarding the install problems, there aren't many reviews of Zunes yet. I've read two that describe install problems and I've read a few users who say they haven't seen it. I don't think there's enough information to judge how common the problem is.
As for the iPod, I've never read a review that mentions an install failure but I've experienced more than one. It's always involved QT and a reboot always fixes it. They were problems nonetheless.
"With the Zune - even those whose install goes well technically, if you look at the screenshots and description of the install process - it is needlessly convoluted and complex, even when it works."
I haven't setup a Zune and never intend to, so I don't have an opinion (or a real interest) in that. It appears that setting up a Zune involves enrolling in the Zune marketplace and that (partially) explains the additional complications. I don't know if it's "needlessly convoluted".
It's not hard to find a Zune review that doesn't complain about the install process or one that is complimentary of the UI. It's also not hard to find one that's totally negative. Since I don't believe that polar opposite reviews can objectively exist, I reserve judgement on the device entirely. Frankly, I think that overwhelmingly negative reviews have an obvious agenda.
Regardless of how egregious the install failure is, it's just not part of the player itself. An impartial review would have distinguished, and if ease-of-use turned out to be great then the review should have reflected it. The fact is that installation typically will only be done once and any problems will likely be addressed quickly. Reviews I've seen that seem objective have been positive on ease-of-use (and, yes, they've pointed out the install failure and the crazy Zune points system).
I am not apologizing for the Zune nor do I even have a desire to own one. I have multiple iPods, I like them, I recognize their flaws, but I realize that ultimately people know how to use iTunes. iTunes manages my music library and nothing else will until something really compelling comes along. Zune isn't it.
Hmmm, I'd like cars to have a little wireless AP that an iPod could play music through and that could provide data services though cellular. I think bluetooth may be better for that though. Obviously, there are more applications for WiFi than the Zune provides.
"Often, yes, they are. Many consider iTunes to be one of the keys to the iPod's success. It's not just the iPod hardware, it's the integration of the whole system."
Yes, but iPod ease of use has nothing to do with iTunes. Integration and ease of use aren't the same either.
"Remember, iTunes itself was a massive hit before the iPod even existed."
Not on the PC it wasn't. What competition existed on the mac before iTunes?
"Not many. That is indeed a problem with usability. If the problem was as widespread as Zune installer problems appear to be, there would be plenty of outrage."
I think the outrage would be universal. What evidence do you have that the Zune install problems are "widespread"?
"How is the software not a part of the usability of the system?"
It is, but who says that "Zune" refers to the system? Does "iPod" refer to the system? No, it doesn't. The iPod and iTunes are separate products that integrate together. You've already recognized that. Point to any review or commentary that discusses iTunes when discussing iPod usability.
"No you couldn't, because that would be stupid and inaccurate."
Yes it would, just as an installer failure being labelled an "ease of use" problem is inaccurate. Any reviewer that intended to be objective, which this certainly was not, would overcome the installer failure, note it in his review, then proceed to analyze ease of use. Why? Because "ease of use" is a runtime consideration, not a startup one.
"You don't seem to have much idea about how users respond to products."
I think I do and I think you don't. I'm a user, after all, and I completely understand that installing and setting up a product is necessary before I use it. Confusing setup with use is something I am not doing, but you and the author are happy to do.
""Out-of-the-box" is just another part of the user experience. I'm not sure why you need to make up a term to differentiate that phase."
Another part, exactly! A part differentiated from "ease of use". I didn't make up the term. It's something Apple takes a lot of pride in. Look it up.
"Once you take it out of the box, your use has begun, and all impressions matter."
No it hasn't but, yes, all impressions matter. I've never argued otherwise. What the author has done has deliberately misrepresent a setup problem in order to criticise ease of use. Doing so allows him to be even more critical of the product without having to actually review its ease of use.
"Anything that makes it harder to set up reduces usability. If it were easy to set up, that's obviously a part of using it that is easier."
No, that's completely wrong as evidenced by your very language. Setup and use are different and unrelated things. Both are important to the product but that doesn't make them the same.
If the Zune is anything like an iPod, it's battery will run dead within 48 hours whether it is used or not. Without the software, the Zune almost certainly will never charge over USB.
"If you don't load the Zune software, you don't have to deal with a.DLL incompatibility..."
Some Zune users haven't had to deal with it anyway. Apparently the install process doesn't always fail.
Slashdot Mirror
"People chose the GPL because it would grant them some rights and believing it would protect them against, tivo subverted the license to things that the original developers didn't want them to do. This is the treason, it might be completely legal but it is unethical and a treason to the people who had putted their sweat into the kernel and did not wish for this to happen."
If that was their belief then it's they're own failure. They dictated the license when they released their code, so if they insist on blaming someone rather than themselves, then they should point the finger at RMS. The GPL has no authority over anything unrelated to what it is licensing. Just because the developers were naive doesn't mean there was any "treason".
"This is clear a case, and in this case is not even a case of misunderstanding on the part of tivo, it is very clear that people wish to grant power to modify and run them when code is licensed with GPL, no one has any doubt in that (unless you're a tivo lawyer)."
Sorry, but you just don't get it. The Tivo hardware is not covered in any way by the GPL and there is no ambiguity in any language. Tivo granted the right to users to modify its code and use it in the manner than the GPL grants. The hardware they sell you is not governed by the GPL, however, and they are under no obligation to make the hardware compatible with the license. RMS understands that, Linus understands it, Tivo understands it, why can't you?
I'll say it again, words are not defined by the Congress. There are the legal meanings of words and then there are the general meanings. You would be wrong to assume that words like "crime" and "theft" are always used in their legal definitions. These words are far broader in their meaning than the legal concepts they describe.
Yes, I got to this:
...before I got really angry. He's positioning himself for the support of the religious right.
"Gingrich sharply criticized campaign finance laws he charged were reducing free speech and doing little to fight attack advertising. He also said court rulings over separation of church and state have hurt citizens' ability to express themselves and their faith."
Anyone who needed a reason to oppose Newt for President just got it, that is unless you favor an authoritarian theocracy.
"The more popular a topic is the [more] edits it receives and the more trustworthy the information is."
I don't agree with that. Trustworthiness is more a function of how invested in the "facts" the contributors are. Where stronger emotions exist you lose trustworthiness.
WP is a great resource just so long as you don't count on it being definitive. Having millions of edits is no guarantee of accuracy.
Yay! I learned something today...and at /. no less!
;-)
Unfortunately, your post is far too informative to get mod points
Many words have multiple meanings. Such is the case with the word "crime"
... http://www.answers.com/criminal&r=67
...then you would be right.
crime: Unlawful activity http://www.answers.com/crime&r=67
Likewise, for criminal:
criminal (n): One who commits a crime: lawbreaker, malefactor, offender.
So, if you insist on the legal definition of the word(s) then you're correct but you shouldn't assume that everyone else is using the language the same way (unless you are speaking with legal counsel). Language requires an understanding of context.
The same argument applies to the word "theft" as it applies to copyright. Those who claim that theft doesn't apply doggedly insist that the definition is strictly a legal one, i.e. larceny. The fact is, though, that "crime" and "theft" are just words and they have broader definitions that just the legal ones.
"Since it is not a criminal offense then it cannot be described as a crime (by the definition of the word)."
So now I hope you understand why this isn't true. If you had said...
"Since it is not a criminal offense then it cannot be legally described as a crime (by the legal definition of the word)."
"I'm not sure what all the ranting here about RMS not having to work for a living is coming from..."
It comes from an ideology that RMS champions that strikes at the heart of virtually all programmer's livelihoods. RMS is a silver-spooner. He's never had to earn a living or worry about how he's going to eat (or how he's going to feed a family). He's totally disconnected from the real world where people work because they need to get paid. He chooses a lifestyle of homelessness (and apparently showerlessness) and, as such, has little appreciation for a more conventional lifestyle. It's easy to insist that all software be free when you're already financially set. RMS has what he *needs*; what he *wants* he doesn't want to pay for.
If you are going to respect someone's advice, it would help to know they have experience in such matters. RMS's views are extremely removed from the mainstream but so is every aspect of his life, so don't believe that his ideas have been formed with an appreciation and consideration of the average man. It's important, sometimes, to understand that.
None of this is a reason to dismiss what he says, though. RMS's fight certainly has a positive effect on our software choices. I don't believe, though, that living in an RMS software/hardware utopia would be a place I'd like to be.
"...against the idea of the GPL, even if there is a loophole is a treason to the people who worked in those programs."
Those people dictated the licensing of their work and Tivo fully complied with their requirements. Where's the "treason"?
...and BSD can be embedded for free.
People believe that the GPLv3 will cause future "Tivos" to be "free" but there's no reason to believe that. If a company does not want its product opened and the GPL ultimately forces it, the result will be that GPL software won't be used. For idealists that will be fine, but for many the increased costs, longer leadtimes, or outright lack of market choices will not please them. The greater restrictions of v3 may lead to a shrinking of contributions and usage of GPL'ed software.
"...I must disagree that Tivo did not subvert GNU/Linux to their own ends."
That implies you know the intent of the authors of the software used by Tivo. Since there are many and at least some of them (perhaps even the most important one) have publicly stated that they support Tivo's usage, I don't think you can make that case. In the end, there's only the GPLv2 license which, everyone agrees, has been respected by the company.
"They intentionally threw that roadblock in place to prevent people from doing whatever they wanted with GPL software."
No, they didn't. They threw the roadblock in place to prevent people from doing whatever they wanted with the HARDWARE.
"You do not agree that such actions are misuse, at least in conflict with the intent of the GPL?"
Yes, I don't agree. That's not to say I wouldn't want things to be different, but I respect that Tivo has done nothing wrong. If RMS chooses to pursue license changes to addrees the issue, he's free to do so. It's not clear that the effect will be positive.
"If you are suggesting that they should be permitted to misuse GPL software in that pursuit..."
Tivo didn't misuse GPL software. Even RMS recognized in the speech that Tivo was in compliance with the GPL. RMS said:
"The Tivo contains a small GNU/Linux operating system, thus, several programs under the GNU GPL. And, as far as I know, the Tivo company does obey GPL version 2. They provide the users with source code and the users can then modify it and compile it and then install it in the Tivo."
So RMS recognizes that Tivo has done nothing wrong with respect to the GPL. He continues:
"That's where the trouble begins because the Tivo will not run modified versions, the Tivo contains hardware designed to detect that the software has been changed and shuts down. So, regardless of the details of your modification, your modified version will not run in your Tivo."
Nothing in GPLv2 governs the hardware that GPL'ed software runs on, however. RMS wants to change that, but that doesn't mean that Tivo has done anything wrong.
"If Tivo doesn't like the idea of people running whatever kernel they want on their hardware, let them write their own kernel and not subvert GNU/Linux."
Tivo didn't subvert anything. They gave everyone their modifications and licensed that work for their competitors to use. What they didn't do is sell a general purpose computing device. RMS seeks to limit future GPL software to run only on a subset of hardware.
"Actually, it does. Because of iTunes' smart playlists, it means that I hardly ever have to interact with the iPod. I already have iTunes set up to select the music/podcasts I want, so I basically just press play and put it in my pocket."
Then any player that has a play button would be easy to use so long as it integrates with iTunes? I thought that iPods were easier to use because of their superior, patented scroll wheels? Not everyone uses iTunes/iPods in the same way and I'm certain it took you some work to get iTunes to manage your player in the manner you prefer.
"The quality of integration is one of the main forces behind ease-of-use, as explained above."
You are free to redefine what constitutes your portable music player in order to meet your "ease of use" perspective. For the rest of us, the player itself is what we use to listen to the music while we aren't at our computer.
"Before iTunes came to Windows, there were many competitors. But iTunes slaughtered them all, even the popular WinAmp."
I don't agree with that at all. I hated iTunes when it came to Windows. Frankly, I considered it 3rd place at best and I didn't use it at all because I had XPlay. I only use iTunes now because everyone I know uses it and it helps when people come over. iTunes is successful on Windows only because people own iPods. iTunes greatest strength, it's store integration, is useless to me because I don't buy DRM'ed music.
iTunes is a terrible performer as well. Importing songs is dog-slow and startup times for me are frequently >30 seconds. I have a large library (>15K songs, >80GB) on a current, dual core machine. Importing folders frequently results in songs getting imported multiple times and iTunes is misable at removing duplicates. Basically, iTunes is crap.
"Note that the iPod is marketed as "iPod + iTunes.""
Really? I just bought 2 iPods, a shuffle and a nano, and I'm looking at the packaging right now. Neither package says iTunes anywhere except in the requirements fine print. iTunes isn't even included in the package. So much for iPods being marketed as "iPod + iTunes". When I buy an mp3 player, I'm buying a device, not a system that is dominated by host software.
"There are plenty of commentary and reviews that discuss iTunes when discussing iPod usability - are you just ignorant of them?"
If I am, you aren't doing anything to enlighten me. As far as I'm concerned, I'm unaware of them because they don't exist.
"It may not be a part of day-to-day use, but it is definitely use."
Stick your head in the sand on that one. I'd expect nothing less. Setup is a one-time thing. That's why it's differentiated from "use".
How is this "evidenced by my language?" Care to elaborate? Setup is definitely a part of use."
No, it's not. Setup and use are different things. When you take your computer out of its box and set it on your desk, is that part of use? Of course not. You use different words to describe the process then claim they are the same thing. Setup and use are not the same.
"Is installing Windows not a part of its use?"
No, it's not. Installing Windows is not part if using Windows.
"Almost everybody would disagree if you were to say that."
Perhaps everyone here would, but that's because they perceive that position to be the "pro-Apple, pro-iPod" position to take. It doesn't matter what the argument is. That's why I get modded as troll and flamebait for making factual statements.
"So where does your thumb drive get the power to do the USB bus negotiations to turn the power on, hmm?"
The thumb drive is a standard mass storage device and the device driver is built into the operating system. No problem.
"...but there is some power there before anything happens, and that is what the USB powered speakers, fans, lights, coffee warmers, and lava lamps run off of."
But not all high power devices aren't going to be able to charge their batteries off of that.
"Also, the power negotiations happen as the USB host controler level, not at the specific driver level, so the system will negotiate the power for the default configuration of the device without any device-specific software installed."
My experience with WinXP is that that is not true. If you don't have a proper driver installed for a high power device then the device never receives the power it wants. I've had devices fail to charge for exactly that reason.
"The device's software can change to a different configuration that might use more power, but the system has to bring it up before it can know about the other configs."
And that could possibly explain it. Larger devices are unlikely to activate their charging circuits until they're getting the power they request. For whatever reason, that sometimes doesn't happen until the host software is installed properly. I've even had devices refuse to charge off a laptop when the charge fine on a desktop, and the crappy Moto RAZR won't charge at all unless it has some residual charge when you plug it in. Just because USB charging CAN be made to work doesn't mean it always works.
Users don't care about what?
No doubt that users care about the entire experience and they'll be turned off by initial problems. I've never argued that the install problem isn't an issue, but the author labelled the install problem as an "ease of use" nightmare then failed to evaluate actual "ease of use".
Right, because Apple fanboys that post as AC as so knowledgable that I can learn something from them. Perhaps if they had something to contribute to the conversation besides a worn out insult...
Sorry to pee on your parade, but I don't one or desire a Zune. It's not surprising, though, that you insult the poster when you can't argue against the post. Why does it burn you so bad that someone would call a fraud a fraud?
You are entitled to fail to understand the language, No one can make you get it.
There is "setup" and "use". Installation is part of "setup", not "use". Ease of "use" is not impacted by a "setup" failure. It's as simple as that. You install a device once but you use it again and again. The hardest device in the world to install may be the easiest to use.
I see. Mac software doesn't exhibit such failures because mac users don't tolerate it, except when they happen and then they do (and in that case they don't count because they aren't mainstream). Makes sense in a fanboy sort of way.
Missing Sync is not shareware and is not restricted to Palm devices. You have to buy it because iSync doesn't actually support the wide range of devices you'd expect it would. It is a commercial mac app that fails in just the manner that was claimed mac apps never do. Sorry if that bursts your superiority bubble.
"So... since it's useless to you no one else should have it?"
;-)
Didn't say that. I said that I don't get why anyone would WANT it.
"Wireless sync is a magical wonderful thing when implemented well, as it can be on the Apple platform."
Haha. It can be on the Apple platform why? Are you saying that only Apple can do it?
"...just go about my routing of plugging it in to its charger in another room."
Wow! So the beauty of wireless sync (that you think only Apple can provide) is that it allows you to locate your charger in another room. Fantastic! I can do that with two chargers
"It's an example of how technology SHOULD work -- unobtrusive and helpful. Two things Microsoft in general and it's Zune in particular are not noted for."
Hmmm. Zune has been out, what, a few days? How does that iPod ProximitySync work?
How do you think an iPod ProximitySync would work when you have configured your device for manual sync because you have a music library far larger than the iod will hold? Not so unobtrusive and helpful then, eh?
Funny, I've read this comment before. It always comes from an AC.
When you can come up with an argument that doesn't rely on the assumption that you are right, perhaps you can try again, Dude.
iPods self-discharge quickly because they never actually turn off. They appear to but any blank screen is indistiguishable from "off". I don't know how long the current models last on standby, but the last one I tested was a 4G and its standby time was about 36 hours. A Lithium polymer or Lithium Ion battery has a low self-discharge rate relative to the few days that iPods exhibit.
;-)
I don't count shuffles in that because they do have an on/off switch. My 2G shuffle battery hasn't run dead yet.
"An iPod will charge over USB without any software installed."
On a mac or a PC? The USB protocol requires that the device specify the power it requires before the power is supplied. Without a driver, USB power might not be applied. Perhaps the iPod doesn't suffer this problem but that doesn't mean the Zune doesn't
Regarding the install problems, there aren't many reviews of Zunes yet. I've read two that describe install problems and I've read a few users who say they haven't seen it. I don't think there's enough information to judge how common the problem is.
As for the iPod, I've never read a review that mentions an install failure but I've experienced more than one. It's always involved QT and a reboot always fixes it. They were problems nonetheless.
"With the Zune - even those whose install goes well technically, if you look at the screenshots and description of the install process - it is needlessly convoluted and complex, even when it works."
I haven't setup a Zune and never intend to, so I don't have an opinion (or a real interest) in that. It appears that setting up a Zune involves enrolling in the Zune marketplace and that (partially) explains the additional complications. I don't know if it's "needlessly convoluted".
It's not hard to find a Zune review that doesn't complain about the install process or one that is complimentary of the UI. It's also not hard to find one that's totally negative. Since I don't believe that polar opposite reviews can objectively exist, I reserve judgement on the device entirely. Frankly, I think that overwhelmingly negative reviews have an obvious agenda.
Regardless of how egregious the install failure is, it's just not part of the player itself. An impartial review would have distinguished, and if ease-of-use turned out to be great then the review should have reflected it. The fact is that installation typically will only be done once and any problems will likely be addressed quickly. Reviews I've seen that seem objective have been positive on ease-of-use (and, yes, they've pointed out the install failure and the crazy Zune points system).
I am not apologizing for the Zune nor do I even have a desire to own one. I have multiple iPods, I like them, I recognize their flaws, but I realize that ultimately people know how to use iTunes. iTunes manages my music library and nothing else will until something really compelling comes along. Zune isn't it.
Hmmm, I'd like cars to have a little wireless AP that an iPod could play music through and that could provide data services though cellular. I think bluetooth may be better for that though. Obviously, there are more applications for WiFi than the Zune provides.
"Often, yes, they are. Many consider iTunes to be one of the keys to the iPod's success. It's not just the iPod hardware, it's the integration of the whole system."
Yes, but iPod ease of use has nothing to do with iTunes. Integration and ease of use aren't the same either.
"Remember, iTunes itself was a massive hit before the iPod even existed."
Not on the PC it wasn't. What competition existed on the mac before iTunes?
"Not many. That is indeed a problem with usability. If the problem was as widespread as Zune installer problems appear to be, there would be plenty of outrage."
I think the outrage would be universal. What evidence do you have that the Zune install problems are "widespread"?
"How is the software not a part of the usability of the system?"
It is, but who says that "Zune" refers to the system? Does "iPod" refer to the system? No, it doesn't. The iPod and iTunes are separate products that integrate together. You've already recognized that. Point to any review or commentary that discusses iTunes when discussing iPod usability.
"No you couldn't, because that would be stupid and inaccurate."
Yes it would, just as an installer failure being labelled an "ease of use" problem is inaccurate. Any reviewer that intended to be objective, which this certainly was not, would overcome the installer failure, note it in his review, then proceed to analyze ease of use. Why? Because "ease of use" is a runtime consideration, not a startup one.
"You don't seem to have much idea about how users respond to products."
I think I do and I think you don't. I'm a user, after all, and I completely understand that installing and setting up a product is necessary before I use it. Confusing setup with use is something I am not doing, but you and the author are happy to do.
""Out-of-the-box" is just another part of the user experience. I'm not sure why you need to make up a term to differentiate that phase."
Another part, exactly! A part differentiated from "ease of use". I didn't make up the term. It's something Apple takes a lot of pride in. Look it up.
"Once you take it out of the box, your use has begun, and all impressions matter."
No it hasn't but, yes, all impressions matter. I've never argued otherwise. What the author has done has deliberately misrepresent a setup problem in order to criticise ease of use. Doing so allows him to be even more critical of the product without having to actually review its ease of use.
"Anything that makes it harder to set up reduces usability. If it were easy to set up, that's obviously a part of using it that is easier."
No, that's completely wrong as evidenced by your very language. Setup and use are different and unrelated things. Both are important to the product but that doesn't make them the same.
If the Zune is anything like an iPod, it's battery will run dead within 48 hours whether it is used or not. Without the software, the Zune almost certainly will never charge over USB.
.DLL incompatibility..."
"If you don't load the Zune software, you don't have to deal with a
Some Zune users haven't had to deal with it anyway. Apparently the install process doesn't always fail.