Napster beat 'em to it. They now limit the number of downloads using the Free 14 day offer to 11 megs... Right below the "Download Napster" button;)
So it appears that they are at least a MITE worried about the old "non-profit" days of Napster coming back...only with a MUCH better search engine, and all with the SAME quality!
With all of the hubbub about Cell and all the information swirling around that it has caught Intel with it's pants down with NO way to compete, this is just their way of saying that they are still relevant.
I suspect that we will see more hyperbole coming from Intel to try to shake off the suspicion that they have reached the plateau of their game. Cell may not be anything near what the hype is saying it is, but if this is Intel's response, you've got to know that they THINK it is.
No, there is OASIS, and there is the format Apple uses for iWork. (it doesn't have a specific catchy product name). If Apple remains true to form, they will publish a detailed document on how to create a.pages document then anyone will be free to create files using that.
It'd be nice to see programs on the PC side pick up on this, but no one produced a Keynote player for PC's (windows OR linux) so I'm not too positive on that.
OASIS, the format Apple uses for iWork, the KEY is that it will be illegal for anyone to reverse engineer the file format for cross patform/application use. Is that the gist of it?
I would think that even the NEW Office will still be able to create good ol'.doc files, so wouldn't it burn their biscuits if people just continued to use that instead? (They'll make some minor feature.newdoc only -playing solitaire while working on a doc?- and everyone will use it, anyway, no wishful thinking here...)
If un-DRM'd music is important, then buying it and removing the DRM doesn't serve your case.
Wildly off-topic only margarinally:) related analogy.
You go to the movies, you get popcorn and you want butter on it. However, THIS theater doesn't offer butter (as a cost cutting move!) so you have to go without. It's really a shame though because this theater has those new X-tra-Comfy(TM) seats with the Mi-T-Grippe(TM) cup holders and the sound system? NOTHING less than Now-UR-Deff(TM) audio! The experience would be truly movilicious if they just had the gosh darned butter!
Of course, if you want popcorn you're not going to do without it, so you start bringing your own sticks. The first few times, they catch you and tell you to toss it, but you soon figure out that by melting it into a reservoir and attaching a hose to that, you can fit it comfortably under your clothes and they're None-The-Wiser(TM).
Meanwhile, the owner's thinking,"Gee, getting rid of the butter saved me TONS!" Does he care if you're sneaking in contraband dairy? No. Why? Because he's ALREADY got your MONEY.
If you want butter, (un-DRM'd music), then PAYING for, ah, not-butter? (DRM'd music) doesn't advance your cause. Sure, you have the instant gratification, but what if you were able to convince millions upon millions that DRM is a universally bad thing? The companies would have NO choice but to give the customer what they want.
On the flip side, even if I personally went to every house and used Hymn to remove the DRM from each one of the 250 million songs sold AND set up a utility that would un-DRM every song bought from now on, each purchase is STILL sending the signal that "I WANT DRM!!"
You didn't really need to learn to use Hymn for that:) Since you're recompressing from an already compressed format, you're doing no better than if you burned the CD then ripped the track back as an MP3. Hymn is really only an advantage if you plan on playing the file on a player that supports AAC.
You should go here to find the solution to your problem. From there, you'll see that once you fill out the webform here you'll have your other authorization back to use.
It's a good point you made, I'm just glad that Apple considered this eventuality.
For the vast majority of the 250 million songs sold, "the man" is giving them EXACTLY what they want. Most haven't heard of hymn and is probably wondering why they would want to use that on their new Mac Mini with the iPod shuffle.
The problem is that those people who TRULY want completely UN'DRM'd music won't take a stand and refuse to buy from the iTMS. Companies respond when customers speak with their dollars. IF, instead of boycotting the iTMS, you purchase the music and un'DRM it, you're still sending the signal (by way of paying for it) that "This is EXACTLY what I want Apple!" Then you've just added your name to the list of hundreds of thousands of other sheep.
If downloadable music without DRM is the desire, then you should accept nothing less. Regardless of what statements you make after the fact, what programs you run, you're supporting the current system to do otherwise.
The iTunes EULA that says that if you purchase from the iTMS (remember, no one is forcing you to AND you can turn off the Music Store completely) then you should abide by their rules.
If you DON'T want to abide by the rules DO NOT use the iTMS. Really, now, is it so difficult to NOT buy electronic DRM'd music especially when you're against electronic DRM'd music in the first place?
It's also mentioned in the article that part of the DRM is to store information elsewhere. He even says that he doesn't know ALL the places where it's stored (I'm sure somewhere within the QuickTime preferences is an unlock key too) so while it may work for now, a new iTunes version could check against this other hidden list and still de-authorize them.
Don't forget that before you can activate the processor, you have to scream for approximately 5 minutes (not constantly, you can take quick breaths). You know you're doing it right when your hair changes color and you start to glow (small rocks lifting from the ground is a good indication as well).
You DO have a strange idea of what "fair use" is. However, I've found that anyone that uses the term "fair use" really has no idea what it's about. They're more interested in having some pseudo legal leg to stand on when explaining that they steal music:)
I don't think it was an update, but Keynote WAS being pushed to life by Steve Jobs because at NeXT, he used Concurrence and I can imagine he still had a reluctance to use PowerPoint when he went back to Apple.
That's because there ARE no technical details! (well no REAL ones to speak of...) This isn't meant to be the be-all and end-all of Open software. It's not even meant to be greatest "office-like" package. It's just a little something that Apple tossed out because they found some people were using Keynote for page layout.
To answer your questions, it uses XML, No, No, No, No, No, No, No.
Not sure what happened to Pages. I read something that mentioned some big changes that happened at NeXT that basically killed the software, but can't remember the link now.
Apple didn't use any of the current "standards" when creating Keynote (though in some places the file is very SVG-like) so they probably followed the same thinking with Pages. If this OASIS thingy gets any traction, it could easily be built into next year's Pages. Anyway, since they'll probably be publishing the schema, anyone who's interested could write a converter app themselves.
The document format is XML and the schema for it should be posted sometime after the release. How SOON after the release I'm not sure.
Just FYI, the Keynote schema that's currently posted on Apple's site is for version 1. V2 can read V1 docs, but cannot save to a V1 format. V1 of course, cannot open a V2 presentation.
And there goes the $499 PC right out the window! If they can't skimp on the graphics cards anymore, then it's going to make it harder for the low end to maintain profitability at that point.
Microsoft was pushing VC-1 based on WMV9) and made a buncha claims, the upshot of which was,"it's just as good as the MPEG4 codec". Based on Microsoft's info, they played better-safe-than-sorry and included it in the original spec. When they attempted to verify the codec, it was found to be sorely lacking (or "not quite as good as a shoe for compression") SO all the first round of MP4 compliant players will be missing any M$ codecs in favor of AVC.
If M$ ups the quality of their codec in time, they COULD be included in the second round, though (which requires someretooling and not something manufacturers are looking forward to).
Paraphrased (and anti-microsoft slant added for Slashdot) from here.
Nahhhh, I don't see it going the way of POG. POG's were only worth as much as their collectible value. While the iPod DOES have limited value (only to computer users, how else to get the music on it??) it's still a music player and in 4 years will still be a music player regardless of what else may be on the market.
Now it MAY go the way of minidisc. I don't think that's too much of a stretch!
When the Xbox rumors were first being presented along with an admission that Microsoft had already chatted with relevant hardware makers about the reference design and they all weren't interested in producing it, I saw the end of the PC as we know it happening.
They would advocate it because they have an opportunity to leave Intel (note that they've been cozy with AMD's 64 of late) and cheap box makers behind and begin to innovate from hardware to software and become more like Apple in that respect which is where I'm sure they'd rather be.
Or it should have at least been sleek. If not looking like a shoe to be funny then at LEAST looking like something Nike would have designed. Then again, this IS the same company that came up with this beauty of a starship.
Slashdot Mirror
So it appears that they are at least a MITE worried about the old "non-profit" days of Napster coming back...only with a MUCH better search engine, and all with the SAME quality!
I suspect that we will see more hyperbole coming from Intel to try to shake off the suspicion that they have reached the plateau of their game. Cell may not be anything near what the hype is saying it is, but if this is Intel's response, you've got to know that they THINK it is.
It'd be nice to see programs on the PC side pick up on this, but no one produced a Keynote player for PC's (windows OR linux) so I'm not too positive on that.
I would think that even the NEW Office will still be able to create good ol' .doc files, so wouldn't it burn their biscuits if people just continued to use that instead? (They'll make some minor feature .newdoc only -playing solitaire while working on a doc?- and everyone will use it, anyway, no wishful thinking here...)
Wildly off-topic only margarinally :) related analogy.
You go to the movies, you get popcorn and you want butter on it. However, THIS theater doesn't offer butter (as a cost cutting move!) so you have to go without. It's really a shame though because this theater has those new X-tra-Comfy(TM) seats with the Mi-T-Grippe(TM) cup holders and the sound system? NOTHING less than Now-UR-Deff(TM) audio! The experience would be truly movilicious if they just had the gosh darned butter!
Of course, if you want popcorn you're not going to do without it, so you start bringing your own sticks. The first few times, they catch you and tell you to toss it, but you soon figure out that by melting it into a reservoir and attaching a hose to that, you can fit it comfortably under your clothes and they're None-The-Wiser(TM).
Meanwhile, the owner's thinking,"Gee, getting rid of the butter saved me TONS!" Does he care if you're sneaking in contraband dairy? No. Why? Because he's ALREADY got your MONEY.
If you want butter, (un-DRM'd music), then PAYING for, ah, not-butter? (DRM'd music) doesn't advance your cause. Sure, you have the instant gratification, but what if you were able to convince millions upon millions that DRM is a universally bad thing? The companies would have NO choice but to give the customer what they want.
On the flip side, even if I personally went to every house and used Hymn to remove the DRM from each one of the 250 million songs sold AND set up a utility that would un-DRM every song bought from now on, each purchase is STILL sending the signal that "I WANT DRM!!"
You didn't really need to learn to use Hymn for that :) Since you're recompressing from an already compressed format, you're doing no better than if you burned the CD then ripped the track back as an MP3. Hymn is really only an advantage if you plan on playing the file on a player that supports AAC.
It's a good point you made, I'm just glad that Apple considered this eventuality.
The problem is that those people who TRULY want completely UN'DRM'd music won't take a stand and refuse to buy from the iTMS. Companies respond when customers speak with their dollars. IF, instead of boycotting the iTMS, you purchase the music and un'DRM it, you're still sending the signal (by way of paying for it) that "This is EXACTLY what I want Apple!" Then you've just added your name to the list of hundreds of thousands of other sheep.
If downloadable music without DRM is the desire, then you should accept nothing less. Regardless of what statements you make after the fact, what programs you run, you're supporting the current system to do otherwise.
If you DON'T want to abide by the rules DO NOT use the iTMS. Really, now, is it so difficult to NOT buy electronic DRM'd music especially when you're against electronic DRM'd music in the first place?
It's also mentioned in the article that part of the DRM is to store information elsewhere. He even says that he doesn't know ALL the places where it's stored (I'm sure somewhere within the QuickTime preferences is an unlock key too) so while it may work for now, a new iTunes version could check against this other hidden list and still de-authorize them.
Don't forget that before you can activate the processor, you have to scream for approximately 5 minutes (not constantly, you can take quick breaths). You know you're doing it right when your hair changes color and you start to glow (small rocks lifting from the ground is a good indication as well).
Now we need Madness back for one more song... When it rains cats and dogs, From my pocket I pick a Mini Mac!
You DO have a strange idea of what "fair use" is. However, I've found that anyone that uses the term "fair use" really has no idea what it's about. They're more interested in having some pseudo legal leg to stand on when explaining that they steal music :)
I don't think it was an update, but Keynote WAS being pushed to life by Steve Jobs because at NeXT, he used Concurrence and I can imagine he still had a reluctance to use PowerPoint when he went back to Apple.
To answer your questions, it uses XML, No, No, No, No, No, No, No.
Makes all the difference(TM) in the world!
Anyway, here's a screenshot for it.
Ah, the joys of XML.
The document format is XML and the schema for it should be posted sometime after the release. How SOON after the release I'm not sure. Just FYI, the Keynote schema that's currently posted on Apple's site is for version 1. V2 can read V1 docs, but cannot save to a V1 format. V1 of course, cannot open a V2 presentation.
And there goes the $499 PC right out the window! If they can't skimp on the graphics cards anymore, then it's going to make it harder for the low end to maintain profitability at that point.
If M$ ups the quality of their codec in time, they COULD be included in the second round, though (which requires someretooling and not something manufacturers are looking forward to).
Paraphrased (and anti-microsoft slant added for Slashdot) from here.
Now it MAY go the way of minidisc. I don't think that's too much of a stretch!
When the Xbox rumors were first being presented along with an admission that Microsoft had already chatted with relevant hardware makers about the reference design and they all weren't interested in producing it, I saw the end of the PC as we know it happening. They would advocate it because they have an opportunity to leave Intel (note that they've been cozy with AMD's 64 of late) and cheap box makers behind and begin to innovate from hardware to software and become more like Apple in that respect which is where I'm sure they'd rather be.
Sounds like IBM is working on essentially the same thing
Or it should have at least been sleek. If not looking like a shoe to be funny then at LEAST looking like something Nike would have designed. Then again, this IS the same company that came up with this beauty of a starship.