Beware the Apple iPhone iHandcuffs 406
Nrbelex writes "Randall Stross makes a fresh and surprisingly accurate review of one of the biggest "features" in the upcoming iPhone and the iPod in general, 'fairplay'. Stross writes, 'If "crippleware" seems an unduly harsh description, it balances the euphemistic names that the industry uses for copy protection. Apple officially calls its own standard "FairPlay," but fair it is not.... You are always going to have to buy Apple stuff. Forever and ever.' Can mainstream media coverage help the battle over DRM or will this warning, like those of the pas, continue to go unnoticed?"
Just rip your CD's fool (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Just rip your CD's fool (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Just rip your CD's fool (Score:5, Informative)
Well, he also blames Apple. He gives the example of eMusic, which sells a lot of music from independent labels without DRM (and that of course with the labels agreement). The same music is sold by Apple in the iTunes Store with their fairplay DRM. It seems that in theses cases Apple's assertion that "we have to use DRM, otherwise the labels would not allow us to sell the music" is not true.
So I guess he has a point, although I don't agree with everything he says. Starting with the headline: the problem is not the iPhone (or the iPod), the problem is the iTunes Store. If you decide to buy your music somewhere else (like - gasp - CDs) you are not locked in at all. But, OK, the iPhone is what all the buzz is about right now, so that's probably the reason for the choice of headline. He also says that by buying the iPhone, you have to use the iTunes Store if you want to buy music online. Then he goes on to give the example of eMusic, which sells millions of songs online in MP3 format without DRM. Obviously, these files will also work on any Apple device.
So, his arguments are at some points a bit flawed, but I think the general intention of raising the awareness for the possible pitfalls of buying DRM music has to be applauded.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Just rip your CD's fool (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, apparently, from an earlier poster...Apple sells these same songs on iTunes that are sold by eMusic (without drm), but, Apple puts DRM on these songs just like from the 'majors'.
I wonder why Apple doesn't see the songs that are ok'ed to be sold without DRM, without DRM? I think Apple would lose a lot of flac they get over iTunes if they did sell some content without Fairplay on it...as long as it was authorized by the labels to do so.
Re:Just rip your CD's fool (Score:5, Insightful)
To a certain degree, I can understand it as a part of Apple's "One Size Fits All" marketting (which I happen to think is damn effective). Currently, when you download a music off of iTMS, every file has the same restrictions, and allows the same freedoms. On the public front, this is simply to make it "easier for the consumer". But in actuality, it is a cover, a little trick to keep record lables from ever pushing more severe DRM... if they put up an umbrella specification on their files, and make a big stink about how it is for user-friendliness, the recording industry just flat out can't argue with them.
Apple's DRM reflects their pricing: 99cents per song. Sure, maybe there could have been a few songs here and there placed at 75cents, but it makes sure that no songs are priced at $3. Their DRM policy is invasive, to be sure, but on the scheme of things, it's the least invasive that ever has been, but it keeps the record industry to go any further.
The bottom line is, DRM has no benefit to Apple. The iTMS is a loss or "break-even" leader, in order to sell iPods... and it's possible that not having DRM would result in a FEW more iPod sales. They have no personal reason to ever want DRM on their material... but they gotta, according to the recording industry. People act like they're not fighting it. They're fighting it like crazy, but they know that they can't win without some form of compromise. DRM is simply one part of the music industry's grand scheme of controlling media. Apple put their foot down when it came to pricing, and they came up with one of the least invasive DRM schemes ever. And the reason they've been able to keep with both of these is because they are completely unwavering in their support of this system. If they were to start selling a few non-DRM tunes, the recording industry would see this as a new-found flexability in Apple's infrastructure, and try to take advantage of that.
This might sound fanboyish, but there's a lot of psychology going in to play here. By setting one universal standard, and utterly keeping with it, it creates a rock-solid wall in which the recording industry can't touch.
Re:Just rip your CD's fool (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because consumers would see that as 99% of the music is crippled as opposed to 1% is free? Despite what you might be led to believe, iTunes isn't taking particularly much flak. Most people have their iTMS music on a an authorized machine or two, and sync it with their iPod or burn a CD if they need. They don't see it, they don't care about it. Just like most people put a DVD in the DVD player, and never see any of th
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think you misunderstand what the major music labels are saying to Apple: "You must sell our music with effective DRM and you must sell our music on equal footing with all other music you sell." This means that were Apple to sell some music without DRM, the major music labels would not allow Apple to sell their music.
I think you are imagining what you would like to believe the major music labels are saying to Apple. Unless, of course, you have some support for this claim.
Do you really believe that App
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Try this: http://www.emusic.com/browse/all.html [emusic.com] I think this will work for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is a button on itunes that allows you to burn your files directly to a cd. Even if its only 4 times, how may times will you need? And again if you don't want any restrictions, and a much better quality, buy a cd. And then copy it as many times as you want.
Re:Just rip your CD's fool (Score:5, Informative)
1. Rip your own CDs. Legal.
2. Borrow your friends' CDs and rip. Not legal in USA.
3. Buy MP3s from AllofMP3.com. Legal in Russia.
4. Buy MP3s from eMusic.com. Legal.
Plenty of sources for music that don't involve iTunes Music Store.
Re: (Score:2)
1.5. Buy your CDs used... at discount prices.
Half.com offers used (yet, like-new) CDs for under $5 at times. If the CD is missing a jewelcase or a booklet, you can sometimes get it for under $5 shipped. If you're just going to MP3 it and chuck the CD on a shelf/spindle/binder, then that's all you really need. And for approximately $2.50 for shipping, you're still getting about half-off the retail price of a new CD.
btw, is it just me or have CD prices gone up significa
Re: (Score:2)
Haha, they probably got rid of it because of people doing things like grabbing 20GB of music in a single month, oh the delicious irony!
Jamendo eMusic (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Just rip your CD's (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I switched to Apple in 2000, because my work Dell laptop running MS Windows would lock-up with blue-screen of death 3-5 times each workday -- while running mainly MS Office applications (including Visio and MS Project). My Apple computers have *never* locked up the whole operating system in 6 years. I have only had a very few application lockups. It is exactly why I own a Honda, not a GM car. Apple computers are just more reliable, and they are not more expensive than comparably equipped Dell, Gateway,
Re:Just rip your CD's fool (Score:4, Insightful)
1. The actually genuinely concerned consumer activists, who don't realize Fairplay is really as good a DRM system as we're probably ever going to get, consumer-wise.
2. The people who are royally pissed that THEIR DRM isn't the stuff being shoved down everyone's throats.
Of course, #2 has some sub camps, based on motivation.
- There are the people who are just royally pissed that they aren't getting the online music sales or MP3 player sales they "deserve" since they're "in the industry", so they obviously deserve a competition free environment. Forever. (The "real" music publishers.)
- There are the people who are royally pissed that the DRM doesn't include a rootkit, doesn't cost $5 a song, allows you to play the songs more than once, allows you to move your music onto normal CDs, onto multiple players, etc. (The anti-fair use people.)
- And there are the people who are pissed that the iNdustry (iPod, iTunes, etc) seems to be propping up Apple, which they thought they had killed off so long ago that no one would notice them borrowing features and themes from OS X for their new big name Operating System release... (The Windows die-hards, not all of which are centered in Redmond.)
All 3 of these camps can easily afford to pay for an astroturfing campaign, so... Who knows?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Buying Apple is like getting married (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
As plenty of others have pointed out, you can put MP3s on iPods, and there are plenty of legitimate places to get those. As far as interoperability goes, Apple does a lot better than MS, although maybe not quite as well as the various Linux distros and programs.
Re: (Score:2)
Buying Microsoft is like losing your virginity (Score:4, Funny)
Then you realize you have 17 viruses.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Buying Microsoft is like losing your virginity (Score:5, Funny)
Then you realize you have 17 viruses.
This is dumb! (Score:5, Insightful)
As far as I'm considered, this is a stupid argument. Slam Sony instead. How about a $400 DVD plaver that won't play MP3 file.
Re: (Score:2)
No, because then you'd make fun of Apple, which is completely unacceptable.
Re:This is dumb! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It comes from a Calvin and Hobbes cartoon, where Susie is wishing some bad things would happen
Article is about iPod, not iPhone (Score:5, Insightful)
phozz
Don't buy it if you don't like it... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:DRM = Incompatible (Score:3, Informative)
They got it part right in the article. The whole lawsuit is that one flavor of DRM is incompatible with another variety of player. While they were at it, why pick on just Apple and Microsoft. Toss in the Sony Min
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's even funnier that emusic is the only online store selling legal MP3's that play on every MP3 player out there including my car stereo and living room DVD player.
As artists drop the RIAA and their lables and move to emusic, I expect things to get uncomfortable for the 4 labels in the cartel. They won't be able to sue and shut this down like they did Napster. They will have to adopt
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not a double standard. Apple does not allow other companies to use FairPlay - if they would, every MP3 player would support it. The whole point for Apple is to support iPod sales and customer lock-in. And Apple does not enable other DRM systems to work on iPod either. They are using the fact that they have the dominant online music store and dominant MP3 player to lock down iTunes users to iPods (because only those can play iTunes music) and to lock down iPod users to iTunes (because only iTunes can sell DR
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The success/volume of the ITMS is directly tied to the fact that the iPod is the most
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Now, it may be that you cold have a third party player "support" FairPly... but how does the music get encrypted and get on their player? You'd have to provide every vendor with the code and encryption keys so their software could work with it. Every vendor would be able to authorize pl
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Don't buy it if you don't like it... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Don't buy it if you don't like it... (Score:4, Informative)
I think I'll go buy a Zune then sue Microsoft because my iTunes songs don't work on the Zune. I hope this case gets thrown out and the woman has to pay the court costs.
Although I am vehemently anti-DRM I couldn't agree with you more. If a consumer purchases a device with DRM, they ultimately must live with that. Hopefully the judgment will we "tough, too bad so sad...". It will actually be a victory for anti-DRM as it will force consumers to spend their money on non-DRM products. Then we will see some real progress.
When I rip my audio CDs, everything goes into DRM free MP3. I even keep them on a Linux share as so Microsoft can't get the originals. It may be paranoid, but that license file in XP bugs me even though I haven't been hit by it yet. I will even hold off on Vista until it is certain Vista will not alter the collection.
Locked music? What about locked OS? (Score:5, Interesting)
Personally, I was pondering how to make the business case for an iPhone at work until I read about the current 3rd party app limitation. As someone who's used the PalmOS for 10 years, I am *not* going back to one-vendor sourced apps. {Prof. Jonathan Ezor, PalmAddict Associate Writer} [typepad.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You might be right, but I'll venture to guess that Apple knows what it's doing. We'll see how sales actually go when the phone hits the market. It's an empirical question, after all.
Besides, a
Re:Locked music? What about locked OS? (Score:5, Insightful)
As a long-time PalmOS user, I look to Palm for both negative and positive examples. Palm's success was built not on the PIM applications, but on 3rd party tools, and while Palm offered certification for software programs, it didn't require certification in order for programs to run. Not only did that drive innovation by 3rd parties, but many of those 3rd party developments put pressure on Palm to extend the basic OS accordingly. Tapped drop-down menus, fullscreen Graffiti entry, running apps off SD cards, full backup (not just PIM apps) and hard button reassignment all began as 3rd party innovations, and were later adopted by the PalmOS. At the same time, though, Palm's uncertainty about whether it was a hardware, software, or OS company has led to stultification of the underlying PalmOS, to the point where the iPhone has a real opportunity not only to get Treo users but non-smartphone users like me (I use a T|X) to cross over, if it's done properly by Apple.
I'm not counting Apple out by any means, nor am I assuming that 3rd party developers won't be able to create homebrew apps that will load and run on the iPhone, Apple-certified or not. That said, I hope that Apple is looking at the PDA rather than cellphone market for inspiration. Otherwise, this Newton 2007 may rot unpicked. {Prof. Jonathan}
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Lack of 3rd party apps will kill the iPhone, at least as a smartphone. While the Blackberry is pretty cool out of the box, it takes a couple extra 3rd party applications to really make it shine.
Hopefully, Jobs statement is more in line with what is required for the blackberry - applications must be signed,
Apple picked the least evil option (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
NOTE: I've owned 4 iPods, 2 still alive
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
DRM is not about piracy, its about controlling the customer for life. It is digitally enforced brand loyalty. Oh, sure, you can leave if you really want to but you'll have to le
Choice (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Because nobody's made a big enough noise about it, I suppose. There still aren't enough popular artists on eMusic for this to be a major issue for people.
Alternatively, consider that Apple would still be selling the music in AAC format, which it claims gives better quality in sma
AAC is open, protected AAC is not (Score:2)
Just to clarify a bit, AAC is as open a format as MP3. It's the MPEG group's successor to MP3. Apple adds their DRM to AAC, creating protected AAC. There's no reason for modern players to not support AAC. Apple's FairPlay is a separate issue.
Re: (Score:2)
Jesus goddamn Christ, how is it possible for fucktards like you--on Slashdot, no less--to remain so ignorant TEN EVERFUCKING YEARS after the introduction of MPEG-2 Part 7?
Are you sure about that? (Score:2)
Are you sure about that? I have a brand new RAZR from Sprint and while it has the capabilities to play mp3s you download from their store, it has no ability to copy your own to the phone (unless you want to save them as ring tones). What makes you think the iPhone would be different? While it is true that you can rip your CDs to an iPod, nowhere was it mentioned that that capability will be included with an iPhone. Downloa
Anti-Apple week (Score:5, Informative)
I own an iPod (3rd gen or something), works great with the hundreds of CDs I own and ripped. I bought 1 song on the iTunes store. The article lie in implying the iPod is limited to FairPlay music. This is not the Zune, iTunes doesn't add a DRM layer to your music. It plays non-DRMed songs just fine.
I own a Mac, plays all the fansubbed unlicensed anime series I get on bittorrent. Works even in FrontRow. And on the video iPod and Apple TV if I batch convert them to H264. Again, non-DRMed video plays fine.
So, allow me not to be scared.
If you want to worry, check the big brotherish content protection in Vista:
A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_
Re:Anti-Apple week (Score:5, Insightful)
Allow me to present my Apple credentials. An original LC owner from around 1993 (I think), then skipped out but back in for a 12" Powerbook when Jaguar was released. Our household has a MacBook Pro, a MacBook, a dual G5 tower, an (Intel) Mac Mini and an SE/30 for nostalgia. Pro-Apple enough perhaps? Well then, I think that as announced so far, the iPhone is a poor product.
I love the look of the interface, though in practice I do wonder how well it's going to stand up to daily use (smears on the screen etc.). Right now though, the hardware itself just looks too weak to me. Not enough features for the cash - my N70 already does functionally more than the iPhone, and that came as a freebie with my contract. I'll admit the Nokia interface is terrible in comparison, but for me at least the OS X interface isn't enough to compensate for the lack of capability in the phone. Not asking for the moon on a stick here - everything I've mentioned can currently be done by other phones, all but GPS in already done by my freebie N70.
Roll on v1.x please.
Cheers,
Ian
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I find it disturbing that so many Slashdot posts feel spending thousands of dollars on Apple gear entitles them to criticize Apple. It doesn't work that way in real life, guys. Take women. I've spent thousands of
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, me too. I don't recall ever spending anything on Apple gear, yet I feel that I'm as entitled to criticize them as anyone... :-)
Seriously, when I saw the first news release I was almost drooling. I mentioned the specs to a couple of friends, with the same results.
Then I saw every single annoying limitation... (specially no third-party software) Now I'm basically not intere
Re:Anti-Apple week (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, THIS model does not have 3G, only 2.5G. But Steve Jobs specifically said they were working on a 3G model. Considering it's only supposed to come in europe around september (so, likely introduced at the paris expo) I frankly expect that it will be a 3G model.
As you said, without 3G, video calling is useless anyway. Beside, video calling is more a gadget than something useful, really... did you ever try videoconf with your webcam ? do you use it regularly ? most people in then do not use it apart from an initial "wow it's cool". And with a webcam there's still a few occasions where it is useful (showing kids to grandparents, business conf..) but these uses are anyway quite impractical for a frickin mobile PHONE. Now tell me that Apple would let you plug an iSight on their new AppleTV, and do videoconf in your living room, and here it would be interesting.
Yes, that sucks. The autonomy seems fairly good though, and there was this talk about using two batteries, but still, it would be better to have a user-replaceable battery. At first I even thought that this black part on the back was here for just that...
There WILL be 3rd party software -- jobs said it, and if you think about it, why mention Cocoa and Core Animation if not ! The question is not that. The question is that apparently Apple wants to "control" the software that will run on the iPhone; how THAT will work is unknown yet (eg, could be a compliance test your app will need to pass, or could be more closed -- we just do not know. Wait for the developer conference this summer...). I admit, as a cocoa developer I'm quite pissed about it, I would have prefererred an open access. Though if it's just a compliance test it will be ok for me (depends of course if it wil be costly or not, or if the compliance test will apply to all apps or only the ones using the GSM chip, etc.). As you see, there's a lot of possible combinations on how that will work, and we can only make conjectures for the moment. But there will be 3rd party software, they said it, and it would be moronic to not have them.
First time I hear that rumor. I frankly doubt you'll have a problem to set your ring tone... anyway, it's only a rumor. Wait for the real device.
Far from a deal-breaker. Sure that would be a nice addition.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, as an owner of a 3G phone for more than a year, the absolute killer app of the phone is...
>No video calling. Minor league problem for me an
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm confused.. (Score:4, Insightful)
This is the same argument every time a new iPod comes out... "hey, it only works with songs from iTunes" and "iTunes only works with iPods." No shit. We know this by now. This article really has nothing to do with the iPhone specifically, it's just another DRM bashing article. Which is fine, I'd love to see it gone as much as the next guy... but as far as DRM goes, Apple's is pretty "fair" IMO and definitely simple.
I spend almost 2 hours yesterday trying to get my little sister's Sansa to work with some songs my mom bought for her from the Walmart music store. Now THAT is some crappy DRM. Crappy software. Crappy everything.
Forever and ever, amen. (Score:2, Interesting)
It's tragic and depressing, it is. If only there were a way for me to burn my FairPlay music to CDs! Then I could listen to it on any device, anywhere, anytime, or even re-rip it, thus ending up with unencumbered music.
C'mon. You're already buying compressed audio or video. If you were serious about quality - or "freedom!!1!!!1!" - you'd be purchasing the highest-quality source material possible, and using lossless compression to archive it. But you're
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, this probably wouldn't occur to a linear-thinking PC user like you. You can thank me for the insight later.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Really, the iPod platform was much more fun before Apple opened it to you PC-using fucktards. We thought there were schisms in the Mac community before
Re: (Score:2)
New Feature for Daemon tools? (Score:2)
How long until someone comes up with FoulPlay? (Score:2)
Ugh sundays... (Score:5, Insightful)
It ends with him saying maybe his boss shouldn't bring him every piece of trash he happens to find.
This, and most 'Sunday' driver stories on
Really the issues is that PlaysForSure DRM doesn't work on the iPod. That's almost always what the bitchin' is about. Well, it doesn't work on the Zune either. And on the flip side, FairPlay doesn't work on their media players. It's not the Mp3 (or in this case iPhone) player's issue. In this case, Apple doesn't support PFS because 1.) MS has never been very forthcoming in sharing and 2.) When Apple is totally and completely dominating a single market they just don't need second rate technology.
The good news is that the iPod plays Mp3s. First and foremost. Playing a DRM-ed song is just an annoyance that people have to put up with if they want easily acquired legal digital music. I told people for years that the reason I used Napster was because there was no effective alternative. When Jobs opened the iTunes store (before anyone else mind you), I had to pay the piper. If I continued to steal my music at that point, I could claim no moral high ground, and I would have been robbing the artists just as much if not more than the RIAA. So, I started buying music from the iTunes store. Yeah, it's DRM-ed, yeah I'll probably be stuck buying iPods for a long time. What a shame. Fortunately for me, and everyone else, iPods have really been popular and easy to come by.
Stories like this just make me wonder WTF we even show up here for on Sundays. Go back to bed. Wake up later. Watch the playoffs.
FairPlay lock in? Not really. (Score:2)
So do I have to buy Apple stuff "Forever and Ever?" As long as they keep doing what they are doing, they're my first preference.
I buy Apple stuff because it really does just work. That's not vendor lock-in, that's superior design. When that changes, well, I'll change vendors. That's called t
article about ITMS, not iPod or iPhone (Score:5, Insightful)
Second, fairplay is not the primary format of the iPod, or even iTunes, and presumable not the primary format of the iPhone. The songs are not translated to a Fairplay format, or any other format, when copied to the iPod. Songs are not by default imported into iTunes as Fairplay files, and there is not even an option to so do. I do not think Apple marks files that are imported in iTunes at all. And while the default import format is the is ACC, is it easy to change it to MP3 which is compatible with most players, except maybe Sony.
So fairplay will only effect users that buy songs from iTunes, and only those songs that are bought from iTunes and not burned to CDs. This is all covered in the article, but not the summary
The article is really about the fact that Apple will not license fairplay. This is really indicates a sad state of writing. First the author decries Fairplay as crippleware, and then complains that it cannot be acquired universally. This is like complaining that polio is a horrible disease, but innoculations means most of us won't get it. The article is correct that if you use the iTMS, you must buy apple stuff. The logical response to this is not to use the iTMS, and fight for non DRM online formats.
Then the article goes onto say that MS is better because it does license formats, but then has to admit that the Zune does not use the format. What the article does not admit is that this situation indicates that there is no money to be made in licenses DRM formats and thus compete with walmart on price instead of locking consumers in to an optional online format.
The point that the article does get to, after losing all credibility, is that consumers may end up with songs a product they cannot use. They may buy Play for sure, and then buy a zune or an iPod. They may have a collection of iTMS tracks, and then buy a Sandisk, in which case they will have to butn all the tracks to CD and reimport then. What the article does not mention is that we did this all before when we copied all our vinyl to tape, and even worse when we replaced all our vinyl with CDs.
I really believe that this article is the case of an uninspired writer cribbing from old articles. The lesson learned, and probably needs to be taught to the masses, is if possible buy a used CD and rip it to your computer.
WOUAF? (Score:2)
Go and criticize Apple where it fits, there's enough to be pissed off about for me as a Mac user. But this and the last article [slashdot.org] are just cheap flamebaits.
Fair Play (Score:2)
Not redundant at all (Score:2, Insightful)
People seem to be missing a big distinction. (Score:3, Insightful)
Okay, you're stuck with Apple's iPodlike devices. So what? They're really good. I realize the people I'm talking to in this form: The Apple Haters and the DRM freedom fighters, but as a well educated IT person, my impression is:
Apple has managed to negotiate with folks that can't be negotiated with. Further, they were able to do so in a way that greatly benifits the customer. In doing so, they managed to jumpstart the current, DEVELOPING, download industry.
Do the permit renting the music? No. and I can see why: Rentals rely on the end user getting complacent and 'forgetting' that $15 a month fee. Once it gets past their notice, and they fall into complacency, the bult of that $15 is free money to the vendor. (Assuming they don't get bought or go out of business, or whatever)
DRM may be an unnecessary evil, but Apples done a lot to make it hurt as little as possible. I can't say that alternative has _ever_ acted with the consumer's interests in mind.
I've got absolutely NO qualms with sticking with Apple. Their products mesh extremely well with my needs.
DRM Jail (Score:5, Insightful)
I bought Pink Floyd's _Dark Side of the Moon_ on vinyl, on "audiophile" vinyl, on cassette, on CD, on "remastered" CD, and again a few times to replace worn-out copies of those (but never on 8-track, smartass - that was my copy of _The Wall_). But then I scanned my audiophile CD to HD/WAV, and have transferred it a dozen times: to backup CD in a closet, to mobile devices, to new HDs that aren't worn out, to SHN, then FLAC compression, to MP3 for streaming to my remote locations. I own that content, and I'll do whatever I want with it that's fair. If I want to prop up a wobbly table leg with the audiophile CD, I'll do it if I damn well please, even if the "license" I bought doesn't specify that use.
These record companies make most of their money from "catalog reissues". Records they made (usually cruelly unfair to artists) deals to sell decades ago, when they profited on their balance sheet. The biggest hits, that already paid for themselves many times over, are naturally the ones most desired to be played today. Because last generation's pop culture is this generations' folk culture - that's why we call our parents our "folks". The corrupt "copyright extension" monopoly laws are bad enough. "Enforcing" them beyond the publisher's rights, destroying rights and purchased privileges of the owner, and the public, is a culture-destroying crime.
And now, Microsoft has painted the picture for everyone to see. Make your player equal "Microsoft", and you'll pay for the privilege of using your own property as often as they "upgrade" their predictably buggy and inconvenient equipment.
Now is the time to make "DRM" as dirty a word as is "censorship". Kill it now, before it's permanently rooted, while people are still surprised to hear we have to dump our "old" content just to play it in some incrementally newer way.
Warning of the PAAS? (Score:2)
What's Past is Pas (Score:2)
DRM is bad, and no DRM is bad. Abandon DRM? (Score:2)
Without DRM in the age of digital music purchases, it's even easier to share music illegally... you don't need to rip music anymore, it's ripped for you. You could even have straight-to-torrent scripts.
Without restrictions on music, we will resort right back to the pre-DRM days. Nothing has changed. People still don't want to have to pay for music
Anything new? (Score:3, Insightful)
- the iPhone is likely to use iTunes for the synching
- this limitation of only supporting Fairplay DRM and Audible DRM, has been around since the iTunes store came out
- iTunes allows you to use your own none-DRMed music
I don't know why the fuss is being made over the DRM on the iPhone, since this argument applies to any iPod out there, and therefore is neither new, nor iPhone specific.
It's a new phone. (Score:2)
Where's the hue and cry there?
This and the "iPhone not running OSX" are just so much ign'ant piling on.
These stories make it and other less silly ones don't - of course you can't mod submissions - so it makes you wonder about the editots' motives.
The headline is right there on the front page / feed - the proof of the folly is buried in the comments, just like retractions are printed on page 7.
/. becoming anti-digg? (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't want this to sound like flamebait, because it represents my actual feelings.
The story this links to is just a typical anit-drm rant. Why is this tied to the iphone? because apple makes it? yeah, give me a real story.
iPhone ? iPod: The Article Misses The Point! (Score:3, Interesting)
The wide capabilities (& wider in next gen releases) of the iPhone are such that any respecting user of technology can see the device as a VCD, Virtual Connection Device.
Whether you are doing a local simple bit of a document or image collection, it is the bi-directional communication with what is arguably an unlimited number of devices through multiple RF & potentially IR methods that means it is a programmable blank slate computing communicator.
Whether you merely do simple things sending and receiving messages, or you actually use a VCD to do complex interactive and controlling functions is entirely up to the software you will eventually load into the VCD.
FairPlay is like a virus... (Score:3, Insightful)
And God Help Me if I should ever even think about buying a Zune and burning the few songs I bought through iTunes onto a CD then re-ripping them for the Zune. Hell, even typing in the four letters 'z', 'u', 'n' and 'e' in that order is causing me incredible amounts of pain and suffering from the FairPlay mental virus that Apple planted in my brain. And besides, if any of my FairPlay ripped CDs ever get into the Zune, it will cripple the Zune forever with a horrible user interface and turn the Zune a crappy shade of brown.
Please. Do you think Steve Jobs gives a flying flip about DRM--outside the fact that it was the only way he could get the music industry to allow him to sell music via the iTunes store? Hell, the DRM lock-in isn't even applied on the iTunes servers--it's applied after the song is downloaded, which means the microsecond the music industry allows Apple to sell DRM-free music, it would take a simple upgrade to iTunes to remove DRM.
Besides, FairPlay is an odd duck--has anyone with an iPod noticed that DRM locked FairPlay music just plays on any iPod without having to register the device first? I mean talk about a weak form of DRM--I suspect it's a slightly more sophisticated version of the bozo bit used in MacOS System 5 or earlier, which was a file attribute bit which told the finder not to copy the specified file. This is unlike every other DRM-enabled device which requires that the device be registered with whatever ID you're using so it can read those files.
iPhone doesn't handcuff you, iTunes store does (Score:3, Informative)
From the article:
This is not true. Only tracks bought from the iTunes store are DRM'd. You're perfectly free to rip your own music, or - legally or illegally - download it from sources without DRM. I encourage everyone not to buy from the iTunes store (although I have to admit to buying about 10 tracks and 2 albums for convenience's sake).
*shrug* (Score:4, Insightful)
For that matter, nothing about the iPod stops you from loading non-DRMed AACs onto it.
So if you don't want limited AACs, go buy a physical CD and rip it yourself, or buy cheap unlimited downloads from other sources like EMusic or the artists themselves and throw them into iTunes, and from there onto your iPod/iPhone/iWhatnot. When Jobs dies and someone else fills the niche of 'computer company that gives a shit about the user experience and style', move your MP3s/AACs/etc onto there.
So much for "always buying Apple". Yeah, if you buy music from the iTunes Store it'll be DRMed. So don't do it.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:No just DRM like the iPod, but signed apps too (Score:5, Informative)
"With the iPhone, Apple is forcing Cingular to support and subsidize a phone that will save users money."
Apparently, RoughlyDrafted feels WiFi is ubiquitous and free while 3G data forces users into high fees. Couldn't be more stupid than that.
Likewise, its "substantiated look at how the iPhone is indeed running OS X" is nothing but substantiated. For example:
"Microsoft has intentionally referred to its various operating environments under the brand Windows, despite the fact that its Windows 95, Windows NT, and Windows CE products lines are all significantly different systems."
In other words, iPhone OS X is "OS X" like all flavors of Windows are Windows just as
"Despite losing the Finder, key ideas are retained on the iPhone that will be familiar to Mac users. Along the bottom of the home screen is an iconic list of its four principle functions: phone, mail, web, and iPod."
They are suggesting that the icons across the bottom of the screen are like the dock, never mind that my dock doesn't run across the bottom of my screen. Apparently, the dock constitutes the "key ideas" that make OS X what it is according to RoughlyDrafted. "Substantiated look" indeed.
The third party software article is even more absurd and offers nothing constructive at all. In fact it's not even worth a read. The author attempts to redirect the argument to the iPod, Zune, and Xbox ignoring the fact that those are fixed function devices while the the iPhone is specifically advertised as a pocketable computer. He also parrots the Apple line that 3rd party software is of unacceptably low quality while ignoring that fact that it's never hindered other computer platforms including the Mac itself and other smartphones before the iPhone. The rest of the article is full of mental masturbation, attempted demonstrations of expertise, and claims of Apple genious and capability. The most blatantly transparent apology of the three.
RoughlyDrafted is just another Apple apologist blog and brings nothing new or interesting to the discussion.