Although we had planned for no one outside of this company to ever use, let alone see the source code, we were now put in a difficult position. We could either give away our hard work, or come up with another solution. Although it was tought to do, there really was no option: We had to rewrite the code, from scratch, for Windows 10.
So, my question is: Why didn't you simply port it to OS X? It would have been infinitely simpler than rewriting from scratch, and a far better decision than subjecting the company to the spyware horrorshow that is Windows 10.
And please don't EVEN try to talk about the cost of replacing hardware with "expensive Macs". That (already suspect) argument would not have stood up against the immense cost of starting from scratch, rather than making a few simple tweaks to run under OS X.
Heck, even if your software was married to X11 in some way, you could have had that under OS X/macOS, too.
So, did you even ONCE stop to think of this ready alternative to the tyranny of the GPL?
BTW, this is why Apple never uses the GPL to license it's own F/OSS Projects (of which they have several).
So, in typical Google fashion, rather than fix Android, they just walk away from it like every other Project, and create ANOTHER OS, but this time with a brand new luster of Vulnerabilities.
What a bunch of arrogant, ADHD children are Google...
Sorry, but I don't reside in these so-called "Apple-Hating walls". I in fact own many Apple devices and I live and work around many MANY people who use said devices themselves. Not once have I ever heard or read any complaints about the iPhone not being waterproof. So I have serious doubts about your claims and will require some sort of proof as to their validity.
Sorry to lump you into the Apple-Hater camp. There is just so much of it on this site it gets hard to distinguish.
I would say that, back when no one claimed water-resistance on their smartphones, you would have been right; but now that Samsung has lied about the water resistance of some of their phones (but, full disclosure, I have a friend that has an S4 that he claims to have taken some in-the-pool underwater shots with), there is increasing pressure on Apple to add this capability.
You have a LOT of anger issues. What with your username acting like a badge to indicate you are a steadfast Apple advocate, your rude posture is actually tainting the Apple brand.
It might be a good idea to calm down and quit attacking others in the discussion with expletives. If I was an Apple brand manager I'd certainly want to squelch you.
But you are simply an
ANONYMOUS
COWARD
So your opinion is valuable as your non-existent Karma.
Even if the (noninteractive) video is delayed by exactly the number of frames to compensate for a particular Bluetooth audio device's lag? That'd affect pause and seek controls, but not the majority of playback.
And how much "latency" are we talking about, here? Yes, even a hundred milliseconds is very noticeable with video/audio sync; but less than about 50 ms. and most people wouldn't even notice. Less than 20ms and almost no one notices.
Apple may not care about DRM one way or the other but they do care about people bypassing their cash generating MFi program and their proprietary lightning connector and using the "audio" jack as a data connection interface. I'm sure they're still trying to figure out how to make Square pay the fee.
Bullshit.
Apple looks the other way on NON-MFI devices ALL the time.
Or do you really think all those $2.99 Lightning cables on Amazon are MFI-registered? Wait, you're probably stupid enough to actually think they are.
Joe Six-Pack doesn't care, as long as "the approved interface" let's him hear the music.
He'll happily pay, and pay, and pay again, if that's what it takes to hear his top 40 tunes.
That's what the **IAAs are counting on.
And so, the ONLY company who has EVER gone up against the **IAAs to REMOVE DRM (and won, to EVERYONE's BENEFIT!!!), is now going to reverse that stance and partner with them to ADD DRM to the EXACT thing they argued against having DRM?
A very interesting article. But people fail to understand that there are other phone vendors besides Apple. Unless all of them remove the jack, then we have no problem. Apple has a problem. No user in his right mind would consider buying a jack-less iPhone. I bought my first phone just because of the integrated MP3/radio player, not the ability to make calls. That was secondary. I never heard anyone say anything good about Bluetooth transmissions. So let's see if Apple pulls it off, but I doubt it.
Better begin to like (or at least accept) "jackless" phones. Apple already isn't the first, and if history is any predictor, if Apple does away with the headphone jack, you won't be able to find 5 phones with one by next year, and zero in two more years.
MFI program is Apple 'drm'. Apple can dictate the capabilities and the headphones that connect directly to the port. Think about Apple owning beats.
Bluetooth audio has no DRM. And they certainly allow a bunch of NON-MFI-Approved cables and adapters already.
Apple understands that this is going to be a sensitive feature, marketing-wise; so I doubt seriously, in their position as marketshare underdog in the phone market, whether they would even begin to think they could get away with a dickish move like requiring DRMed earbuds/headphones, even if they wanted to (which I honestly don't believe they do).
Because it is so technically difficult to make the headphone jack be water proof? Of course it is not. Stop making stupid arguments to defend Apple, fan boy.
Apparently, Samsung is finding that it is, indeed...
The #1 complaint is "I saved $86 getting an Android phone instead, so Apple sucks balls".
You mean "All I saved was a paltry $86 getting an Android phone instead, and it has 10 vulnerabilities that will never get fixed, and now one Russian and three Chinese Servers have all my personal information..."
Here you have this insanely popular electronic device that people have with them at all times, and what's the number one complaint about it? No, no,/. friends, no, it's not planned obsolescence. It's "this thing dies if it so much as looks at water."
I highly doubt this is the #1 complaint. I doubt it's the #100 complaint.
Outside of the Apple-Hating walls of this site, you'd be wrong. Very wrong.
If that's the direction they're going to go I'd like to imagine it's going to be a complete failure because people don't have the money or wherewithal to spend on special speakers from Apple (the computer company, not the music company).
Not to mention the fact that Apple actually tried to sell a set of amplified speakers back in the heyday of the iPod, and it was a dismal failure. Not because they sucked (they didn't); but because it just wasn't the right product for Apple.
- Next year, no one with any practicality will care that much because there's a $12 adapter for regular headphones.
And you forgot the most important one:
Next year, no one will care because every other phone will copy the iPhone (again/still) and remove the headphone jack as well. (In fact, Apple already isn't the first doing this).
Have fun with that god awful latency and random drops. BT isn't ready for prime time at all. I've got a Nexus 6P and the signal routinely fails to transmit in my car, and heaven help me if I get a phone call. Also don't try to watch video on anything other than low latency BT, because it's a noticeable delay without the low latency, which is, of course, more expensive and not perfect.
Stupid fuck.
First, who cares about "latency" (do you even know what that means) when there is nothing to compare the delayed-signal to? If we're talking about music, the audio could have 30 MINUTES of latency, and you wouldn't know it.
As for random drops? Get a decent headset/phone.
I don't have bluetooth in my car; but I used my old iPhone 4s with a rental car with Bluetooth (a Kia Elantra?), and in a week of use, experienced zero dropouts or other idiocy; so now what?
And according to rumor, Apple is using low-latency BT. So, no problems with video-sync.... NEXT!
Apple knows that this is going to be a controversial feature; so I am completely sure they will get it right.
Whoosh! Apple's devices will not have output transducers available. He's saying you may require Apple branded DRM devices before you'll be able to access your purchased media. What are you going to do, stick a mic up against their fucking terrible earbud? That's that fucking problem, dipshit.
No.
The fucking problem is that you don't understand electronics. Even if the only way to capture the analog signal would be from the earbuds themselves, no microphone would be needed.
And Apple actually makes some fairly decent earbuds; just not the ones that get included for free with your iPhone/iPod (just like with everyone else).
You missed the point of DRM. The stream of bits coming out of the iPhone can be encrypted and must be decrypted before the DAC can take place. The decryption keys will only exist in approved devices (speakers or headphones).
I'm sorry you don't understand how electronics works; but in a word, "No".
Slashdot Mirror
Google is even worse at starting and abandoning Projects than Microsoft EVER was; and that's saying something...
Although we had planned for no one outside of this company to ever use, let alone see the source code, we were now put in a difficult position. We could either give away our hard work, or come up with another solution. Although it was tought to do, there really was no option: We had to rewrite the code, from scratch, for Windows 10.
So, my question is: Why didn't you simply port it to OS X? It would have been infinitely simpler than rewriting from scratch, and a far better decision than subjecting the company to the spyware horrorshow that is Windows 10.
And please don't EVEN try to talk about the cost of replacing hardware with "expensive Macs". That (already suspect) argument would not have stood up against the immense cost of starting from scratch, rather than making a few simple tweaks to run under OS X.
Heck, even if your software was married to X11 in some way, you could have had that under OS X/macOS, too.
So, did you even ONCE stop to think of this ready alternative to the tyranny of the GPL?
BTW, this is why Apple never uses the GPL to license it's own F/OSS Projects (of which they have several).
So, in typical Google fashion, rather than fix Android, they just walk away from it like every other Project, and create ANOTHER OS, but this time with a brand new luster of Vulnerabilities.
What a bunch of arrogant, ADHD children are Google...
Actually, according to TFS, actually TWO separate Vulnerabilities.
Kinda reminds me of the "heyday" of Windows Exploits.
And of course, the worst thing is that most Android devices in the wild will never see a patch for any of them...
It wasn't the kind of product Apple could mark up the price to the profit point they expect.
More like it wasn't the kind of product people would look to Apple for.
Sorry, but I don't reside in these so-called "Apple-Hating walls". I in fact own many Apple devices and I live and work around many MANY people who use said devices themselves. Not once have I ever heard or read any complaints about the iPhone not being waterproof. So I have serious doubts about your claims and will require some sort of proof as to their validity.
Sorry to lump you into the Apple-Hater camp. There is just so much of it on this site it gets hard to distinguish.
I would say that, back when no one claimed water-resistance on their smartphones, you would have been right; but now that Samsung has lied about the water resistance of some of their phones (but, full disclosure, I have a friend that has an S4 that he claims to have taken some in-the-pool underwater shots with), there is increasing pressure on Apple to add this capability.
You have a LOT of anger issues. What with your username acting like a badge to indicate you are a steadfast Apple advocate, your rude posture is actually tainting the Apple brand.
It might be a good idea to calm down and quit attacking others in the discussion with expletives. If I was an Apple brand manager I'd certainly want to squelch you.
But you are simply an
ANONYMOUS
COWARD
So your opinion is valuable as your non-existent Karma.
Ever watch a video with BT lag? It's unbearable.
Even if the (noninteractive) video is delayed by exactly the number of frames to compensate for a particular Bluetooth audio device's lag? That'd affect pause and seek controls, but not the majority of playback.
And how much "latency" are we talking about, here? Yes, even a hundred milliseconds is very noticeable with video/audio sync; but less than about 50 ms. and most people wouldn't even notice. Less than 20ms and almost no one notices.
Then there's low-latency Bluetooth...
Get off their dick.
How is what I said untrue?
Apple may not care about DRM one way or the other but they do care about people bypassing their cash generating MFi program and their proprietary lightning connector and using the "audio" jack as a data connection interface. I'm sure they're still trying to figure out how to make Square pay the fee.
Bullshit.
Apple looks the other way on NON-MFI devices ALL the time.
Or do you really think all those $2.99 Lightning cables on Amazon are MFI-registered? Wait, you're probably stupid enough to actually think they are.
DMCA's rules about DRM are stupid and most normal people don't care...
At least we agree here. Most people don't care until lawyers come after them. Remember DeCSS?
Yes, I remember that people even wrote songs about it, and people to this day have the Decryption Key in their Sigs.
In fact, the only way "out" for the MAFIAA was to create Blu-Ray with entirely different encryption (which also got broken, IIRC).
And a significant fire hazard
If your vibrator is a significant fire hazard, you need to add a little lube...
Joe Six-Pack doesn't care, as long as "the approved interface" let's him hear the music. He'll happily pay, and pay, and pay again, if that's what it takes to hear his top 40 tunes. That's what the **IAAs are counting on.
And so, the ONLY company who has EVER gone up against the **IAAs to REMOVE DRM (and won, to EVERYONE's BENEFIT!!!), is now going to reverse that stance and partner with them to ADD DRM to the EXACT thing they argued against having DRM?
You Haters sure are a stupid lot.
A very interesting article. But people fail to understand that there are other phone vendors besides Apple. Unless all of them remove the jack, then we have no problem. Apple has a problem. No user in his right mind would consider buying a jack-less iPhone. I bought my first phone just because of the integrated MP3/radio player, not the ability to make calls. That was secondary. I never heard anyone say anything good about Bluetooth transmissions. So let's see if Apple pulls it off, but I doubt it.
Better begin to like (or at least accept) "jackless" phones. Apple already isn't the first, and if history is any predictor, if Apple does away with the headphone jack, you won't be able to find 5 phones with one by next year, and zero in two more years.
MFI program is Apple 'drm'. Apple can dictate the capabilities and the headphones that connect directly to the port. Think about Apple owning beats.
Bluetooth audio has no DRM. And they certainly allow a bunch of NON-MFI-Approved cables and adapters already.
Apple understands that this is going to be a sensitive feature, marketing-wise; so I doubt seriously, in their position as marketshare underdog in the phone market, whether they would even begin to think they could get away with a dickish move like requiring DRMed earbuds/headphones, even if they wanted to (which I honestly don't believe they do).
Because it is so technically difficult to make the headphone jack be water proof? Of course it is not. Stop making stupid arguments to defend Apple, fan boy.
Apparently, Samsung is finding that it is, indeed...
There are devices with a headphone socket that is sealed and waterproof ... this is not usually the entry point for water on most devices ...
You mean like the not-so-water-resistant-after-all Galaxy S7?
The #1 complaint is "I saved $86 getting an Android phone instead, so Apple sucks balls".
You mean "All I saved was a paltry $86 getting an Android phone instead, and it has 10 vulnerabilities that will never get fixed, and now one Russian and three Chinese Servers have all my personal information..."
Here you have this insanely popular electronic device that people have with them at all times, and what's the number one complaint about it? No, no, /. friends, no, it's not planned obsolescence. It's "this thing dies if it so much as looks at water."
I highly doubt this is the #1 complaint. I doubt it's the #100 complaint.
Outside of the Apple-Hating walls of this site, you'd be wrong. Very wrong.
If that's the direction they're going to go I'd like to imagine it's going to be a complete failure because people don't have the money or wherewithal to spend on special speakers from Apple (the computer company, not the music company).
Not to mention the fact that Apple actually tried to sell a set of amplified speakers back in the heyday of the iPod, and it was a dismal failure. Not because they sucked (they didn't); but because it just wasn't the right product for Apple.
So less convenient, for no gain except for a phone that is even thinner! (Because thinner is better ....?)
Considering we started with Bag Phones, yes.
- Next year, no one with any practicality will care that much because there's a $12 adapter for regular headphones.
And you forgot the most important one:
Next year, no one will care because every other phone will copy the iPhone (again/still) and remove the headphone jack as well. (In fact, Apple already isn't the first doing this).
Have fun with that god awful latency and random drops. BT isn't ready for prime time at all. I've got a Nexus 6P and the signal routinely fails to transmit in my car, and heaven help me if I get a phone call. Also don't try to watch video on anything other than low latency BT, because it's a noticeable delay without the low latency, which is, of course, more expensive and not perfect.
Stupid fuck.
First, who cares about "latency" (do you even know what that means) when there is nothing to compare the delayed-signal to? If we're talking about music, the audio could have 30 MINUTES of latency, and you wouldn't know it.
As for random drops? Get a decent headset/phone.
I don't have bluetooth in my car; but I used my old iPhone 4s with a rental car with Bluetooth (a Kia Elantra?), and in a week of use, experienced zero dropouts or other idiocy; so now what?
And according to rumor, Apple is using low-latency BT. So, no problems with video-sync.... NEXT!
Apple knows that this is going to be a controversial feature; so I am completely sure they will get it right.
Whoosh! Apple's devices will not have output transducers available. He's saying you may require Apple branded DRM devices before you'll be able to access your purchased media. What are you going to do, stick a mic up against their fucking terrible earbud? That's that fucking problem, dipshit.
No.
The fucking problem is that you don't understand electronics. Even if the only way to capture the analog signal would be from the earbuds themselves, no microphone would be needed.
And Apple actually makes some fairly decent earbuds; just not the ones that get included for free with your iPhone/iPod (just like with everyone else).
You missed the point of DRM. The stream of bits coming out of the iPhone can be encrypted and must be decrypted before the DAC can take place. The decryption keys will only exist in approved devices (speakers or headphones).
I'm sorry you don't understand how electronics works; but in a word, "No".