Re: In honor of iPod and King Jobs, arise and chant the Holy Word

On Jun 12, 8:55 pm, Mitch <m...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <1181672482.173203.254...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,

<sollet...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It doesn't.
Since Apple's approach to fair use and user restrictions are the
loosest in the industry, and show the strongest tendency toward letting
the user do as he wants, you should be criticizing _anyone_ else.

Loosest in the industry. Superlol :) iPod's competitors don't force
you to use a proprietary music program (i. e. iTunes) to dload music
to it.

And just what is the problem with using a specific program to load and
manage content?
Seriously -- it has a specific program to load content. Why is that any
kind of problem? Unless you are going to show that there is a
disadvantage to using iTunes, or it isn't good at something, or it
creates a conflict?

There is. iTunes is irritating, bloated, large, and on Windows
automatically makes it so that any media file on your PC will play w/
iTunes instead of what you already had (forcing you to switch it
back), . . .

iTunes is an arrogant monument to itself. Mountable FLASH file
systems, which is what competing players use, is not, and allow you to
use ANY FREE software or ANY software under the sun to manage content.

Are you saying that you'd be upset with another kind of device that
forced you to use a specific tool to operate it?
Since iPod is meant to be a music player, is there some reason it
should have been made to load music in some less-sophisticated way? Or
is there a benefit to loading music as files into a storage device?

Apple has shown a strong interest in making their hardware compatible
with other devices, accessories, and types of use. This undoes another
worry of 'proprietary' devices -- that they will limit the user in
other ways.

Right, I can run MacOS on ANY x86 PC I want, instead of Mac's own.

I thought you were talking about iPod.
I agree Mac OS isn't made for any but Apple's hardware. Many of us
think that's a very strong advantage, and no problem at all.

Stong advantage? LOL! Why bother with an OS that only runs on a
system of Apple's own design, when you can run FreeBSD, Ubuntu,
Windows on ANY x86 PC, even one you build yourself?


Right, ATRAC files play ANYWHERE.

See the other post. I have no idea why you would bring up Sony.
People using iPods may use several formats; and many probably use the
very common MP3 before anything else.
Maybe you are thinking only of the purchases from iTunes Store?

I meant to say AAC, which isn't widely supported except maybe by Zune
and Apple.


You suggest Jobs would be part of your complaint, but he has done
nothing less than save the online music industry. He did it by

Being greedy by making exclusive deals with the labels and selling
music in a CLOSED format that only plays in iPods.

He didn't make exclusive deals; those labels made contracts with many
other distributors. Many.
He didn't make greedy deals. The reason any of them went along with it
is because they got the biggest piece, and Apple didn't look to get
much at all.
The DRM idea was the label's idea; Jobs argued to make it more open,
they wanted it more closed. In other words, he was fighting for YOUR
side of the argument.
Purchases from iTunes Store are NOT limited only to iPods. They never
have been. They can also play on the computer that purchases them (a
very common usage) and they can be burned as audio CDs (a very very
common usage, with no limits at all!).

AAC, though open, isn't widely supported on competing players, because
of its silly license requirement, and furthermore, until recently,
they all had DRM-protection on it, forcing you only to use an iPod or
an Apple-approved player that was DRM compliant (I dunno of any off
hand, do you?)


So where you got the idea that Apple's iPod or iTunes Store is a
problem just mystifies. They are the one store you should be behind if
you are concerned about these issues. They are your good guys.

Is that why Apple won't make AAC free of license requirements? The
best format to use is FLAC, because to make a player that plays FLAC
doesn't require any license.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT ipods
    ... It's a fucking portable audio player. ... The only area you can really say the iPod / iTunes combi falls down on ... Clearly, as iTunes has proven to be such a problem, Google is too. ... Cart about music videos and stuff and plug them ...
    (uk.rec.cars.modifications)
  • Re: iPod hassles
    ... of getting rid of the iTunes store completely in iTunes? ... Of course Apple could have done it without introducing iTunes, ... the player operation itself would have been complicated. ... the iPod, apple chose to remove features to make a simpler interface. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.system)
  • Re: OT - ipods
    ... All the other players can use WMP, explorer interface, whatever, to sync, and the iPod won't. ... Sandisk Sansa, and who on here hasn't used something made by Sandisk and not liked it? ... So far I haven't seen anything except the iTunes interface itself being much different, so I think it will come down to a matter of choice. ... iTunes will only recognize an Apple MP3 player, so if you are set on synching using iTunes that may be the way you want to go. ...
    (sci.med.transcription)
  • Re: Appleopoly DOES exist
    ... Apple is the only company that can produce a MP3 player that can link ... to iTunes. ... latest 'iPod killer'. ... Sure, if you don't have an iPod, you can't buy songs for your music ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: THAT DAMN YOKO AGAIN
    ... People always seem to confuse iTunes and the iPod with the iTunes store. ... downloads therefore it makes less sense to cripple it ...
    (rec.music.beatles)
Loading