We had our air conditioning limited and thermostats locked up in the machine room and it was always sweltering. We defeated that system by hanging a drop light under the thermostat.
Email attachment size limits probably came with the increase of virus and spam scrubbing. Software on the mail server would pattern match 100,000 possible threats against everything arriving. That made our own mail server delay incoming email for hours sometimes, so we stopped doing that (and went to a different system). There's no practical limit to an email attachment size within the bounds of file system rules (I've sent multi-gigabyte attachments to myself for grins).
Otherwise, ISPs are not that interested in storing more than they need to. I've actually seen people email files to themselves, and keep them in email, because they can find files easier in email than in their file system.
Very expensive workstations? I wouldn't go there. Have you ever supported an SGI Flame? Now THAT's an expensive workstation.
Several things led to our migration to Macs away from PCs; Windows specific problems which were common on all the workstations [eventually], reduction in our support staff, noticing that we removed a bunch of 7 year old Macs that still worked and we dumpstered twice as many PCs in the same timeframe, and the surprise that the first G5 we ever tried (2.0GHz DP) ran rings around a 2.6GHz DP Windows machine with After Effects.
We installed the Mac as a second workstation in a few rooms. The artists resisted at first, then used the Macs to keep designing while the Windows box was rendering, then within a month told us to remove the PC from the room - they would never use it again. The artists got more done in less time on the Mac which more than paid for any difference in initial hardware cost in the first two days.
If you don't like the Apple hardware lineup, then fair enough, neither do I. They've got huge holes that remain unfilled. Significant software and hardware is coming online for OS X daily and we've found very few things that couldn't be done on the Mac. Now, with Intel Macs (have a few installed), that problem is solved as well.
All our high end graphics and compositing moved to Macs from Windows a few years ago and 98% of our daily problems went away. Now, when the artists hear about other people's problems with Windows environments, they consider it an odd duck operating system from Mars. Guess what... it is now. Once you get over the relatively small orientation hump on the Mac, you'll wonder why you wasted your time screwing with Windows for so long.
Amen to that, brother. Working for a place that does high end broadcast television work, most of the company moved from "why use a Mac?" to "why in the hell would anyone use Windows?" All it took was installing a few G5 workstations and within a year, all the Windows zealots were buying their own Macs.
They rib me by saying "you turned me into a Mac head!" and my answer is, "no, all I did was install the tools and you decided that yourself."
Oh. I knew there was a 68k piece in the OS (a translator) but also thought the 68k emulation was very much hardware dependent. I've heard of SheepShaver and will need to look into that just for grins. I do use Minivmac and it hilarious how fast a Mac Plus runs at several GHz. It's so fast it's almost unusable.
But this isn't planned forced obsolesence as was the case with Apple.
I would chalk it up to Piss Poor Prior Planning [PPPP]. Planned forced obsolescence is correct if you take the "planned" part out. The useful life of each of those processor lines hit a brick wall and Apple HAD to switch. Apps I used on my Mac Plus on OS 6 still work on my G5 today, all because Apple put that 68K emulation layer into the PPC architecture. Somehow, they couldn't talk Intel into doing that.
Not all the old apps work but I can live with that. I don't NEED to use Microsoft Works version 2 anymore. I've got DOS apps and Windows 95 apps that won't run on XP and some wouldn't even work on Windows 98. I'll blame the authors of the apps for all of those forward migration issues.
The only planned obsolescence I can remember from Apple is killing the ability to boot OS 9 on their machines. That was forced but I think it was holding back the hardware architecture. The other thing that appeared forced was to start using Xcode for development. That caught a lot of developers with their pants down when Apple went to Intel, but only because they ignored the warnings for the previous two years to migrate their code bases.
Apple uses the Fairplay DRM to suit their needs too.
So? iPods were selling like hotcakes before and after DRM. Who cares? Don't use iTunes and come up with a better system. The world is waiting. I say use RFID implants where your music only plays within 30 feet of your body.
Everyone forgets about Apple holding off higher prices. The RIAA wanted $2.95 for hot tracks and Apple told them to bugger off (Microsoft would have split the profits with the RIAA by now). Apple also had to make concessions to the RIAA or there would be no iTunes store. A business deal isn't good until both parties are equally unhappy. Same goes for you.
On top of that, in the last 5 years of the iPod, Apple has released one slick improvement over another in the face of almost NO competition. If it were Microsoft's baby (for instance), they would have achieved market dominance and then stopped ANY improvements (see IE, XP and everything else they make). If the Zune had come out 5 years ago and hit like the iPod, we'd still be using the same damned hardware.
Re:unprecedented evile having its way with US?
on
Giant Ice Shelf Snaps
·
· Score: 1
You have to read it with a Rap groove. Then it still doesn't make sense.
I don't want to see Apple get a strong monopoly an more than I do Microsoft.
Nor do I, but they have it for now. So far, Apple has used their de-facto monopoly to keep our prices down and preserve as much freedom as they can against the wishes of the RIAA. They've also signed thousands of Indie labels to potentially end run the RIAA once and for all. The RIAA knows not to push Apple because Steve Jobs will simply find a different model for music distribution and it won't include them. They'll be very broke, very fast. Of course, that will bring the other Apple Music lawyers around again, but that's another thread.
Nullifying the RIAA won't solve the "stealing music" business so DRM in some shape is going to be with us for a while - at least until the honor system for payments to artists takes hold. That said, I agree that any entity with a strong monopoly for a high demand item is a bad thing (see: RIAA, OPEC etc.).
In this digital age, how does something intangible, like music and movie files, get tagged to the rightful "owner"? If it were up to the RIAA, there would be no physical media to "own" nor any files to freely toss around the Internet. That pretty much limits the options. What about a physical key like a DirecTV style card which fits into your playback items? Fingerprint readers? Retnal scans? Given the options, FairPlay DRM doesn't seem so bad at this point but there has to be a better solution that won't dissolve "fair use" like we're seeing now.
You can't do it with the iTunes store, either! When you buy a song from iTunes, you get one chance to download it. If you lose the file and want a new copy, you get to pay for it all over again.
The point of DRM is to hide the user's key from himself
Ahh... minor detail... yes, they don't want the user to strip the DRM from the music file itself. But there are Open Source DRM projects going on right now. A quick Google search will reveal several such projects.
I agree that DRM is evil and all and that DRM should not be in the hands of one controlling entity. However, we're actually battling the RIAA and they've got control of the music we want. I'm just thankful it's not the RIAA's brand of DRM. The RIAA is the problem and so are the people who want to steal music. DRM is the key to some level of trust and the source of the uneasy truce between the RIAA and the consumer. Any breach of that "trust" between RIAA and FairPlay will weaken Apple's position next time negotiations come around so it's in Apple's best interest to break jhymn and other DRM crackers. Otherwise, the RIAA will be able to leverage Apple just like it bent Microsoft over. Everyone is theorizing that Microsoft is taking an innovative approach to the RIAA and paying them a royalty for every player sold. Since when does Microsoft pay royalties to anyone? I think the RIAA demanded that as the cost of entry because they dont' trust Microsoft or their technology. The RIAA has been yelling about royalties on players for years. They missed the boat on Apple but they got Microsoft.
I can hear the difference but I don't care, and I do use a higher bit rate to recompress.
The chief problem with doing the audio I/O loop is that you can hear everything going on inside the computer. Put a good amplifier on a computer analog output and crank it up (just don't blow your brains out with an alert sound). Some machines sound like an R2 unit convention in there, especially if you start launching stuff.
Now, if you had an optical digital I/O (all currently shipping Macs including laptops have optical digital I/O), you wouldn't even be scaling the signal or doing D/A-A/D conversion. Haven't tried it myself but that would do the trick.
How come I can't load up songs from iTMS on a non-Apple player?
Because it would have meant adopting a competely proprietary solution for the store from Microsoft - both the audio file format AND the DRM are proprietary. That's too dangerous for words. Just ask all the other music stores that used WMA "Plays For Sure". Heh... They're screwed!
If you really want to buy from the iTunes Store, you can burn a CD and re-encode it to whatever the hell you want. Make it a lossless codec and you haven't lost anything. Otherwise, buy a CD and rip that.
How come the iPod doesn't work with most over music stores out there?
Who cares? It's mostly the same damned library anyway. Otherwise, buy a CD and rip that.
The answer is DRM, and it doesn't have anything to do with the RIAA.
DRM has EVERYTHING to do with the RIAA, no matter who issues it.
Apple wields DRM as a tool to try to lock people in just like Microsoft does.
Only on the iTunes Store. The iPod was first and foremost an MP3 player and still is. iTunes is first and foremost a CD ripper, music library organizer, iPod manager and audio CD burner. The iTunes Store came much later and is a different animal working with the permission of the RIAA. That's the only place you'll find DRM and it's because of the RIAA. Apple won't license FairPlay as a tool for lock-in but they can do that since they own the whole ecosystem. We don't have to like it and they don't have to care. AAC is a published standard and they aren't beholden to anyone else's DRM or usage model. It's up to you to buy in or go away.
Wow. You're the first person who has ever called me a moderate. But, you're correct - it's all relative. Anyway, if I buy something from iTMS, it's for the sake of expediency. Otherwise it's a ripped CD for me.
If Apple started to lose out to Microsoft, with its brown-nosed pandering to the RIAA, I might indeed start encouraging people to use iTMS in order to combat that.
To that, I'd say "make up your mind now". Would you really wait for Microsoft to start gaining traction before something is done about it or will you make sure they can never gain traction? I'd say you're hurting the cause with the discouragement. There are advantages with iTunes, like the ability to re-download all your purchased music if a fire wipes out your house. You can't do that with CDs. When asked about this myself, I'll lay out the ups and downs without using the word "evil" and let the user decide. They usually get hooked on downloading music. To the typical user, they don't know from DRM. They can throw music around on their desktops, laptops and iPods all day long and they're happy about it. It's only a problem when someone wants to "share" or if some weirdo (statistically) would rather be using an iRiver Clix.
there can be no such thing as literal "open source DRM," because it must be closed by its very nature.
Open Source DRM is certainly possible. With proper encryption, the key is tagged to the user, not to the media and it's not in the source code. Everyone can look at the source code and create their own authentication system but the key to unlock purchased media is a secret which belongs to the user.
FairPlay is not open sourced or licensable because it sells iPods. That's what I hope gets changed at some point. Perhaps choose a partner like Toshiba and get some big brown iPod-like devices out there with large screens that squirt pictures. That'll nail the coffin shut, eh?
pressed CDs are more durable than burned ones
That's what I thought, except I've got a bunch of pressed CDs that are unplayable at the outer edges now (both copies of the Louis Prima Collection, Steely Dan Gold, King Teddy II (don't ask), Alice In Chains Unplugged.. etc) but all my CD-Rs dating back from 1997 are perfectly playable. No paper labels and Taiyo Yuden disks.
" The point is that Apple can make any change at any time, arbitrarily, and with or without your consent."
You're already reacting to something that hasn't occured and ranting accordingly... and not making complete sense. I see what you're driving at, though, so let me guess what the voices in your head are saying - you think DRM is a bad thing as most consumers do and believe that any Corporation may alter the terms of any agreement at any time, also a bad thing. Agreed. Where your ranting falls apart is the suspicion of Evil on the part of anyone touching DRM and the expectation that the worst is absolutely going to happen.
The Voices are jumpy about Apple's apparent capitulation to the RIAA to apply DRM at all. That doesn't make them all bad in my book. Certainly, Apple could have refused to create and use FairPlay at which point there would be no iTunes [Music] Store. The RIAA would say "no way, Ray" and that's a real short conversation. Apple didn't just make FairPlay for fun, it was a compromise.
DRM IS OPTIONAL in Apple land, not required. The restrictions Apple had to include for DRMed music on iTunes ONLY applies to the material bought online. It does not extend to ripped CDs, much to the displeasure of the RIAA. If you don't like DRM, rip a CD to your iTunes/iPod and shut up. There is no DRM. Rip it to MP3, AAC, WAV or AIFF if you want (just not OGG).
The big flaw I see with iTunes was restricting the number of networked connections to iTunes without regard to whether all your music is DRMed or ripped from CD. Both music types are restricted and there must be a better way. Until that's sorted out, that's a problem but I still blame the RIAA for that restriction, not Apple. Actually, I'll take that back - I'll blame the people who created software to circumvent the safety features against stolen music and the RIAA reacted by demanding a fix which affected all of us [ -thieves].
Anything short of "Pay Per Play" with variable demand pricing displeases the RIAA, so Apple has done admirably well holding off the real Evil in this equation. Apple initially included the ability to share music between computers, even over the Internet, but the RIAA has subsequently negotiated a limit on that - probably because of shared music rippers. They've also negotiated the ability to burn CDs from DRMed music with some but not all the restrictions the RIAA wanted. The RIAA has repeatedly come back at Apple to further tighten the restrictions and, for the most part, Apple has refused. You win some, you lose some but through Apple's efforts, whatever is on your iPod or iTunes is NOT DRMed if you ripped it from CD and why all music is $0.99 across the board. If the RIAA had their way... PAY PER PLAY THROUGH THE NOSE, BABY!!
However, I also sense that DRM which is not open sourced bothers you. It bothers me as well. Any technology we invest in that can be retroactively altered or obsoleted by a single entity is dangerous. There goes all your music. In the absense of a currently workable alternative which also allows the kind of access we have, I'll put my money on Apple trying their best to protect my interests. That's what I'd expect from a Liberal Hippie outfit like Apple {that was a compliment) and that's been their track record so far.
"You can burn a CD and re-import it until Apple decides you can't"
BZZZZZZZT
If it was up to Apple, there wouldn't be any DRM. It's the RIAA who decides whether DRM exists and how loose it gets.
On the other hand, Microsoft, which is creating voluntary DRM laden software and files anyway, would [additionally] leverage DRM to hold your files hostage until you paid them a royalty. You think they're pandering to the RIAA now with the bendover they did with Zune? If their version of a music store ever gained significant traction, you can bet they'll sell us down the river in exchange for cash. Our cash.
Very nice entry to this capability. MHO: I don't want to buy, run or support Windows, I just want to run Windows apps under OS X. Crossover (Wine port) is where more effort should go.
Totally agree it ain't gonna happen. Yes, I've seen recording contracts hanging around in Nashville for a few years just after the country music crossover boom. It's not a contract, it's a career plan and complete trap. That said, the major artists are really tied to their label as the source of their success, so switching them out would meet with resistance... and, as you point out, they'd need to escape their contract with the devil. That's why the paragraph started with "Wouldn't it be great"
If the RIAA actually represented ARTISTS instead of their own 600 pound gorilla bureaucracy, I'd side with the RIAA over a lot of this music stealing. Unfortunately, the RIAA is a Trade Association (translation: lobbiest group) with "record labels" as supporting members and the "record labels" use ARTISTS as slave labor. Being enslaved is only profitable for relatively few artists because most of them get a monthly statement from the "record label" showing they owe money. Not a single ounce (dollar) of of whatever the RIAA extorts in court goes back to the ARTISTS who were supposedly harmed.
Wouldn't it be great of all the ARTISTS banded together to form their own group to develop, distribute and protect the music they create. Something which would cut all the middle men out of the loop permanently and directly benefit the ARTISTS. I'll bet most people would respect copyright law a little more. Only THEN would I consider paying a blanket tax on products (iPods, recording media etc) instead of putting up with DRM to support ARTISTS.
"...OS X goes largely unexploited, and for good reasons - too much work with little gain."
Windows is the only OS I know of that will get an exploit if you leave it alone long enough. Only the "air gap firewall" can help it.
Security comparisons between OS X and Windows has less to do with smarter users (trust me on that one) and more to do with the origin of the OS. Windows is a shell on top of DOS which was not a network aware OS (why am I telling you this?). Everything built on top of 'WinDOS' in the Redmond vacuum chamber didn't even consider the dangers of an unauthenticated scripting host with free access to anything and everything on the machine. That's a primary issue with Windows. Outlook just has to check for new email to obey the embedded commands. The Internet was a very rude awakening for Microsoft.
The real motherlode is all the Windows machines connected straight to DSL and cable modems. That's the electronic equivalent of standing on a street corner in Key West bent over with your shorts down to your ankles. It's also the source of almost 100% of the spam we get.
Mac OS X was built upon a flavor of Unix (there - I said it) which was network aware from the start with 100,000 sets of eyeballs on the code.
That said, I heartily agree that "click here to see the dancing monkeys" exploits are the fault of naive users.
I'm not in favor of ANYONE going on a FAULT FINDING MISSION against a manufacturer, especially one who has shown more due diligence than most. No need for them to do the same exercise with Vista - a month on the Internet will take care of that. Relatively, both OS X and Linux have proven themselves in general security rather handsomely.
But really... what if January was a month of testing Kevin and LMH's kneecaps with iron pipes without letting them talk it over first? How would they feel? That's essentially what they wish to do with OS X and I'm sure they've already got some things lined up. That makes it a premeditated ambush.
If they were being helpful, then be helpful. Discuss it with Apple first. If their goal is to cause damage, then a fie upon their kneecaps. Any reasonable soul with an ounce of integrity wouldn't even do this to Microsoft.
Hopefully, Apple will welcome the testing with patches for all three vulnerabilities which will make them even stronger.
Slashdot Mirror
The Macs built this century don't tend to misbehave under OS X. And, yes, everything mostly does "just work" with remarkably little effort.
We had our air conditioning limited and thermostats locked up in the machine room and it was always sweltering. We defeated that system by hanging a drop light under the thermostat.
Email attachment size limits probably came with the increase of virus and spam scrubbing. Software on the mail server would pattern match 100,000 possible threats against everything arriving. That made our own mail server delay incoming email for hours sometimes, so we stopped doing that (and went to a different system). There's no practical limit to an email attachment size within the bounds of file system rules (I've sent multi-gigabyte attachments to myself for grins).
Otherwise, ISPs are not that interested in storing more than they need to. I've actually seen people email files to themselves, and keep them in email, because they can find files easier in email than in their file system.
Very expensive workstations? I wouldn't go there. Have you ever supported an SGI Flame? Now THAT's an expensive workstation.
Several things led to our migration to Macs away from PCs; Windows specific problems which were common on all the workstations [eventually], reduction in our support staff, noticing that we removed a bunch of 7 year old Macs that still worked and we dumpstered twice as many PCs in the same timeframe, and the surprise that the first G5 we ever tried (2.0GHz DP) ran rings around a 2.6GHz DP Windows machine with After Effects.
We installed the Mac as a second workstation in a few rooms. The artists resisted at first, then used the Macs to keep designing while the Windows box was rendering, then within a month told us to remove the PC from the room - they would never use it again. The artists got more done in less time on the Mac which more than paid for any difference in initial hardware cost in the first two days.
If you don't like the Apple hardware lineup, then fair enough, neither do I. They've got huge holes that remain unfilled. Significant software and hardware is coming online for OS X daily and we've found very few things that couldn't be done on the Mac. Now, with Intel Macs (have a few installed), that problem is solved as well.
All our high end graphics and compositing moved to Macs from Windows a few years ago and 98% of our daily problems went away. Now, when the artists hear about other people's problems with Windows environments, they consider it an odd duck operating system from Mars. Guess what... it is now. Once you get over the relatively small orientation hump on the Mac, you'll wonder why you wasted your time screwing with Windows for so long.
No, only meaningful work with competent creatives is done on Macs.
Amen to that, brother. Working for a place that does high end broadcast television work, most of the company moved from "why use a Mac?" to "why in the hell would anyone use Windows?" All it took was installing a few G5 workstations and within a year, all the Windows zealots were buying their own Macs.
They rib me by saying "you turned me into a Mac head!" and my answer is, "no, all I did was install the tools and you decided that yourself."
I almost choked when I read that. I'm SURE Microsoft would love to make it better... can't wait to see that popup window:
Error -127: Non-Standard Codec
You must download the MS-OGG compatibility extension
Press any key to continue. Press any other key to exit.
Oh. I knew there was a 68k piece in the OS (a translator) but also thought the 68k emulation was very much hardware dependent. I've heard of SheepShaver and will need to look into that just for grins. I do use Minivmac and it hilarious how fast a Mac Plus runs at several GHz. It's so fast it's almost unusable.
Blood red.
I would chalk it up to Piss Poor Prior Planning [PPPP]. Planned forced obsolescence is correct if you take the "planned" part out. The useful life of each of those processor lines hit a brick wall and Apple HAD to switch. Apps I used on my Mac Plus on OS 6 still work on my G5 today, all because Apple put that 68K emulation layer into the PPC architecture. Somehow, they couldn't talk Intel into doing that.
Not all the old apps work but I can live with that. I don't NEED to use Microsoft Works version 2 anymore. I've got DOS apps and Windows 95 apps that won't run on XP and some wouldn't even work on Windows 98. I'll blame the authors of the apps for all of those forward migration issues.
The only planned obsolescence I can remember from Apple is killing the ability to boot OS 9 on their machines. That was forced but I think it was holding back the hardware architecture. The other thing that appeared forced was to start using Xcode for development. That caught a lot of developers with their pants down when Apple went to Intel, but only because they ignored the warnings for the previous two years to migrate their code bases.
So? iPods were selling like hotcakes before and after DRM. Who cares? Don't use iTunes and come up with a better system. The world is waiting. I say use RFID implants where your music only plays within 30 feet of your body.
Everyone forgets about Apple holding off higher prices. The RIAA wanted $2.95 for hot tracks and Apple told them to bugger off (Microsoft would have split the profits with the RIAA by now). Apple also had to make concessions to the RIAA or there would be no iTunes store. A business deal isn't good until both parties are equally unhappy. Same goes for you.
On top of that, in the last 5 years of the iPod, Apple has released one slick improvement over another in the face of almost NO competition. If it were Microsoft's baby (for instance), they would have achieved market dominance and then stopped ANY improvements (see IE, XP and everything else they make). If the Zune had come out 5 years ago and hit like the iPod, we'd still be using the same damned hardware.
You have to read it with a Rap groove. Then it still doesn't make sense.
Nor do I, but they have it for now. So far, Apple has used their de-facto monopoly to keep our prices down and preserve as much freedom as they can against the wishes of the RIAA. They've also signed thousands of Indie labels to potentially end run the RIAA once and for all. The RIAA knows not to push Apple because Steve Jobs will simply find a different model for music distribution and it won't include them. They'll be very broke, very fast. Of course, that will bring the other Apple Music lawyers around again, but that's another thread.
Nullifying the RIAA won't solve the "stealing music" business so DRM in some shape is going to be with us for a while - at least until the honor system for payments to artists takes hold. That said, I agree that any entity with a strong monopoly for a high demand item is a bad thing (see: RIAA, OPEC etc.).
In this digital age, how does something intangible, like music and movie files, get tagged to the rightful "owner"? If it were up to the RIAA, there would be no physical media to "own" nor any files to freely toss around the Internet. That pretty much limits the options. What about a physical key like a DirecTV style card which fits into your playback items? Fingerprint readers? Retnal scans? Given the options, FairPlay DRM doesn't seem so bad at this point but there has to be a better solution that won't dissolve "fair use" like we're seeing now.
You can't do it with the iTunes store, either! When you buy a song from iTunes, you get one chance to download it. If you lose the file and want a new copy, you get to pay for it all over again.It's actually an Apple policy within the last year to let you do that ONCE:a pple_gave_me_b.html - lets-people-re-download-all-your-music-once/
http://wilwheaton.typepad.com/wwdnbackup/2006/09/
http://thecontent.wordpress.com/2006/05/24/itunes
After that, get a clue and BACK UP!
The point of DRM is to hide the user's key from himselfAhh... minor detail... yes, they don't want the user to strip the DRM from the music file itself. But there are Open Source DRM projects going on right now. A quick Google search will reveal several such projects.
I agree that DRM is evil and all and that DRM should not be in the hands of one controlling entity. However, we're actually battling the RIAA and they've got control of the music we want. I'm just thankful it's not the RIAA's brand of DRM. The RIAA is the problem and so are the people who want to steal music. DRM is the key to some level of trust and the source of the uneasy truce between the RIAA and the consumer. Any breach of that "trust" between RIAA and FairPlay will weaken Apple's position next time negotiations come around so it's in Apple's best interest to break jhymn and other DRM crackers. Otherwise, the RIAA will be able to leverage Apple just like it bent Microsoft over. Everyone is theorizing that Microsoft is taking an innovative approach to the RIAA and paying them a royalty for every player sold. Since when does Microsoft pay royalties to anyone? I think the RIAA demanded that as the cost of entry because they dont' trust Microsoft or their technology. The RIAA has been yelling about royalties on players for years. They missed the boat on Apple but they got Microsoft.
I can hear the difference but I don't care, and I do use a higher bit rate to recompress.
The chief problem with doing the audio I/O loop is that you can hear everything going on inside the computer. Put a good amplifier on a computer analog output and crank it up (just don't blow your brains out with an alert sound). Some machines sound like an R2 unit convention in there, especially if you start launching stuff.
Now, if you had an optical digital I/O (all currently shipping Macs including laptops have optical digital I/O), you wouldn't even be scaling the signal or doing D/A-A/D conversion. Haven't tried it myself but that would do the trick.
Because it would have meant adopting a competely proprietary solution for the store from Microsoft - both the audio file format AND the DRM are proprietary. That's too dangerous for words. Just ask all the other music stores that used WMA "Plays For Sure". Heh... They're screwed!
If you really want to buy from the iTunes Store, you can burn a CD and re-encode it to whatever the hell you want. Make it a lossless codec and you haven't lost anything. Otherwise, buy a CD and rip that.
How come the iPod doesn't work with most over music stores out there?Who cares? It's mostly the same damned library anyway. Otherwise, buy a CD and rip that.
The answer is DRM, and it doesn't have anything to do with the RIAA.DRM has EVERYTHING to do with the RIAA, no matter who issues it.
Apple wields DRM as a tool to try to lock people in just like Microsoft does.Only on the iTunes Store. The iPod was first and foremost an MP3 player and still is. iTunes is first and foremost a CD ripper, music library organizer, iPod manager and audio CD burner. The iTunes Store came much later and is a different animal working with the permission of the RIAA. That's the only place you'll find DRM and it's because of the RIAA. Apple won't license FairPlay as a tool for lock-in but they can do that since they own the whole ecosystem. We don't have to like it and they don't have to care. AAC is a published standard and they aren't beholden to anyone else's DRM or usage model. It's up to you to buy in or go away.
Wow. You're the first person who has ever called me a moderate. But, you're correct - it's all relative. Anyway, if I buy something from iTMS, it's for the sake of expediency. Otherwise it's a ripped CD for me.
If Apple started to lose out to Microsoft, with its brown-nosed pandering to the RIAA, I might indeed start encouraging people to use iTMS in order to combat that.To that, I'd say "make up your mind now". Would you really wait for Microsoft to start gaining traction before something is done about it or will you make sure they can never gain traction? I'd say you're hurting the cause with the discouragement. There are advantages with iTunes, like the ability to re-download all your purchased music if a fire wipes out your house. You can't do that with CDs. When asked about this myself, I'll lay out the ups and downs without using the word "evil" and let the user decide. They usually get hooked on downloading music. To the typical user, they don't know from DRM. They can throw music around on their desktops, laptops and iPods all day long and they're happy about it. It's only a problem when someone wants to "share" or if some weirdo (statistically) would rather be using an iRiver Clix.
there can be no such thing as literal "open source DRM," because it must be closed by its very nature.Open Source DRM is certainly possible. With proper encryption, the key is tagged to the user, not to the media and it's not in the source code. Everyone can look at the source code and create their own authentication system but the key to unlock purchased media is a secret which belongs to the user.
FairPlay is not open sourced or licensable because it sells iPods. That's what I hope gets changed at some point. Perhaps choose a partner like Toshiba and get some big brown iPod-like devices out there with large screens that squirt pictures. That'll nail the coffin shut, eh?
pressed CDs are more durable than burned onesThat's what I thought, except I've got a bunch of pressed CDs that are unplayable at the outer edges now (both copies of the Louis Prima Collection, Steely Dan Gold, King Teddy II (don't ask), Alice In Chains Unplugged.. etc) but all my CD-Rs dating back from 1997 are perfectly playable. No paper labels and Taiyo Yuden disks.
" The point is that Apple can make any change at any time, arbitrarily, and with or without your consent."
You're already reacting to something that hasn't occured and ranting accordingly... and not making complete sense. I see what you're driving at, though, so let me guess what the voices in your head are saying - you think DRM is a bad thing as most consumers do and believe that any Corporation may alter the terms of any agreement at any time, also a bad thing. Agreed. Where your ranting falls apart is the suspicion of Evil on the part of anyone touching DRM and the expectation that the worst is absolutely going to happen.
The Voices are jumpy about Apple's apparent capitulation to the RIAA to apply DRM at all. That doesn't make them all bad in my book. Certainly, Apple could have refused to create and use FairPlay at which point there would be no iTunes [Music] Store. The RIAA would say "no way, Ray" and that's a real short conversation. Apple didn't just make FairPlay for fun, it was a compromise.
DRM IS OPTIONAL in Apple land, not required. The restrictions Apple had to include for DRMed music on iTunes ONLY applies to the material bought online. It does not extend to ripped CDs, much to the displeasure of the RIAA. If you don't like DRM, rip a CD to your iTunes/iPod and shut up. There is no DRM. Rip it to MP3, AAC, WAV or AIFF if you want (just not OGG).
The big flaw I see with iTunes was restricting the number of networked connections to iTunes without regard to whether all your music is DRMed or ripped from CD. Both music types are restricted and there must be a better way. Until that's sorted out, that's a problem but I still blame the RIAA for that restriction, not Apple. Actually, I'll take that back - I'll blame the people who created software to circumvent the safety features against stolen music and the RIAA reacted by demanding a fix which affected all of us [ -thieves].
Anything short of "Pay Per Play" with variable demand pricing displeases the RIAA, so Apple has done admirably well holding off the real Evil in this equation. Apple initially included the ability to share music between computers, even over the Internet, but the RIAA has subsequently negotiated a limit on that - probably because of shared music rippers. They've also negotiated the ability to burn CDs from DRMed music with some but not all the restrictions the RIAA wanted. The RIAA has repeatedly come back at Apple to further tighten the restrictions and, for the most part, Apple has refused. You win some, you lose some but through Apple's efforts, whatever is on your iPod or iTunes is NOT DRMed if you ripped it from CD and why all music is $0.99 across the board. If the RIAA had their way... PAY PER PLAY THROUGH THE NOSE, BABY!!
However, I also sense that DRM which is not open sourced bothers you. It bothers me as well. Any technology we invest in that can be retroactively altered or obsoleted by a single entity is dangerous. There goes all your music. In the absense of a currently workable alternative which also allows the kind of access we have, I'll put my money on Apple trying their best to protect my interests. That's what I'd expect from a Liberal Hippie outfit like Apple {that was a compliment) and that's been their track record so far.
That said, I still burn a CD of whatever I buy.
"You can burn a CD and re-import it until Apple decides you can't"
BZZZZZZZT
If it was up to Apple, there wouldn't be any DRM. It's the RIAA who decides whether DRM exists and how loose it gets.
On the other hand, Microsoft, which is creating voluntary DRM laden software and files anyway, would [additionally] leverage DRM to hold your files hostage until you paid them a royalty. You think they're pandering to the RIAA now with the bendover they did with Zune? If their version of a music store ever gained significant traction, you can bet they'll sell us down the river in exchange for cash. Our cash.
"...and Apple who always got stolen from of all people."
Oh, sure, NOW the Government is looking!
Very nice entry to this capability. MHO: I don't want to buy, run or support Windows, I just want to run Windows apps under OS X. Crossover (Wine port) is where more effort should go.
Totally agree it ain't gonna happen. Yes, I've seen recording contracts hanging around in Nashville for a few years just after the country music crossover boom. It's not a contract, it's a career plan and complete trap. That said, the major artists are really tied to their label as the source of their success, so switching them out would meet with resistance... and, as you point out, they'd need to escape their contract with the devil. That's why the paragraph started with "Wouldn't it be great"
If the RIAA actually represented ARTISTS instead of their own 600 pound gorilla bureaucracy, I'd side with the RIAA over a lot of this music stealing. Unfortunately, the RIAA is a Trade Association (translation: lobbiest group) with "record labels" as supporting members and the "record labels" use ARTISTS as slave labor. Being enslaved is only profitable for relatively few artists because most of them get a monthly statement from the "record label" showing they owe money. Not a single ounce (dollar) of of whatever the RIAA extorts in court goes back to the ARTISTS who were supposedly harmed.
Wouldn't it be great of all the ARTISTS banded together to form their own group to develop, distribute and protect the music they create. Something which would cut all the middle men out of the loop permanently and directly benefit the ARTISTS. I'll bet most people would respect copyright law a little more. Only THEN would I consider paying a blanket tax on products (iPods, recording media etc) instead of putting up with DRM to support ARTISTS.
"...OS X goes largely unexploited, and for good reasons - too much work with little gain."
Windows is the only OS I know of that will get an exploit if you leave it alone long enough. Only the "air gap firewall" can help it.
Security comparisons between OS X and Windows has less to do with smarter users (trust me on that one) and more to do with the origin of the OS. Windows is a shell on top of DOS which was not a network aware OS (why am I telling you this?). Everything built on top of 'WinDOS' in the Redmond vacuum chamber didn't even consider the dangers of an unauthenticated scripting host with free access to anything and everything on the machine. That's a primary issue with Windows. Outlook just has to check for new email to obey the embedded commands. The Internet was a very rude awakening for Microsoft.
With only 30% (or so) of the servers on the Internet being Windows http://news.netcraft.com/archives/web_server_surve y.html, why are they the clear majority of compromised servers? http://attrition.org/errata/statistics/stats-26.ht ml. I've seen numbers in the 95% range and I'm still seeing Code Red and Nimda attacks on my logs. That dims the safety through obscurity excuse.
The real motherlode is all the Windows machines connected straight to DSL and cable modems. That's the electronic equivalent of standing on a street corner in Key West bent over with your shorts down to your ankles. It's also the source of almost 100% of the spam we get.
Mac OS X was built upon a flavor of Unix (there - I said it) which was network aware from the start with 100,000 sets of eyeballs on the code.
That said, I heartily agree that "click here to see the dancing monkeys" exploits are the fault of naive users.
I'm not in favor of ANYONE going on a FAULT FINDING MISSION against a manufacturer, especially one who has shown more due diligence than most. No need for them to do the same exercise with Vista - a month on the Internet will take care of that. Relatively, both OS X and Linux have proven themselves in general security rather handsomely.
But really... what if January was a month of testing Kevin and LMH's kneecaps with iron pipes without letting them talk it over first? How would they feel? That's essentially what they wish to do with OS X and I'm sure they've already got some things lined up. That makes it a premeditated ambush.
If they were being helpful, then be helpful. Discuss it with Apple first. If their goal is to cause damage, then a fie upon their kneecaps. Any reasonable soul with an ounce of integrity wouldn't even do this to Microsoft.
Hopefully, Apple will welcome the testing with patches for all three vulnerabilities which will make them even stronger.