Not sure how reliable the news source is, but the idea is pretty interesting none the less!
Posted by Andrei on Sat Jan 27th at 12:18am 2007
Not sure how reliable the news source is, but the idea is pretty interesting none the less!
Posted by Forceflow on Sat Jan 27th at 8:34am 2007
Forceflow
member
2420 posts
342 snarkmarks
Registered: Nov 6th 2003
Location: Belgium

Occupation: Engineering Student (CS)
Posted by FatStrings on Sun Jan 28th at 3:35am 2007
EDIT: i believe i heard somewhere that someone made a hack to bypass that though?
FatStrings
member
1242 posts
132 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 11th 2005
Location: USA
Occupation: Architecture Student
Posted by Orpheus on Sun Jan 28th at 3:55am 2007
Hold up a sec, while I work up a tear. So, you have to buy an Ipod, to listen to... wait for it.... Itunes.
Go figure.
As the world comes crashing down.
Orpheus
member
13860 posts
1547 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 26th 2001
Location: Long Oklahoma - USA

Occupation: Long Haul Trucking
The best things in life, aren't things.
Posted by fishy on Sun Jan 28th at 5:57am 2007
Posted by reaper47 on Sun Jan 28th at 3:10pm 2007
Posted by Orpheus on Sun Jan 28th at 3:17pm 2007
Is it? so Ipod has their own recording studio and has music with the Itune banner? Tell me that Itunes are unique and end my misery.
Somehow I feel that this is just a case of "Members only" syndrome.
I am also betting that the music that is unavailable is available elsewhere. People aren't bitching about the machine, just their lack of access to it without buying the rights.
Orpheus
member
13860 posts
1547 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 26th 2001
Location: Long Oklahoma - USA

Occupation: Long Haul Trucking
The best things in life, aren't things.
Posted by reaper47 on Sun Jan 28th at 4:11pm 2007
But encoding all the music files from iTunes as iPod only is obviously asshole-ish. Imagine I buy 50 Britney Spears (or Justin Timberlake, depending on your musical preferences) songs from iTunes. My iPod breaks, is outdated, whatever and I decide to buy a new MP3 player not supported by Apple. I can't listen to my beautiful Britney Spears songs anymore. How stupid is that?
I don't know how this works in reality (I avoided iTunes from the beginning, mainly because of instinct) but there's something fundamentally flawed with this logic.
Posted by Orpheus on Sun Jan 28th at 4:31pm 2007
Then it seems to me you have two options:
1) don't buy Ipod products.
2) avoid them until the bugs are worked out.
The idea that they have a flaw, and you buy one anyway in the hopes that you'll get the chance to gripe about them is fundamentally flawed. I dunno about anyone else, but how freaking strange is that? You buy it knowing its got issues. Is one in denial about this and thinks "I bought it, I have rights"
I dunno. I am not really into music enough to care so I am a bit underwhelmed by this whole thing. To me, its no more important than the doggy turd in the neighbors yard three houses down.
In other words, I cannot have a vote. I do not see a problem, but that doesn't mean that one isn't there. It just strikes me wrong to bitch, knowing the issues exist before purchasing. 
Orpheus
member
13860 posts
1547 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 26th 2001
Location: Long Oklahoma - USA

Occupation: Long Haul Trucking
The best things in life, aren't things.
Posted by reaper47 on Sun Jan 28th at 5:13pm 2007
Well, I didn't. It's not that they mention it in their stylish commercials (or anywhere else it would be easy to look up for that matter).
Posted by French Toast on Sun Jan 28th at 5:24pm 2007
1) DON'T BUY THROUGH iTUNES!
iTunes is bulls**t anyways, you're paying fullprice for a lossy format. I've never bought through iTunes, so I'll never have a problem. Download it or buy the CD ffs, just quit the bitching.
French Toast
member
3043 posts
300 snarkmarks
Registered: Jan 16th 2005
Location: Canada

Occupation: Kicking Ass
Posted by reaper47 on Sun Jan 28th at 5:31pm 2007
This isn't about the iPod, it's about iTunes. I like the iPod. I never used iTunes.
I don't understand how people can get so annoyed over others complaining about a product? It's not that Apple is some kind of sympathetic, little company that needs your support. I fully agree with Norway.
Posted by Orpheus on Sun Jan 28th at 6:04pm 2007
I don't understand how people can get so annoyed over others complaining about a product? It's not that .
If I sound like I'm annoyed, I apologize. My intention is only to comprehend. It sounds like I am opposed to what you say, but its only because the definitions you have given have no correlation in my life except those I would avoid buying.
This is how it sounds to me. You bought a brand new EXPENSIVE set of wheels for your Ford car. They cost you bunches. You wrecked your car and buy another Ford. But the wheels won't fit.
What do you do now? Complain because the store you bought them from didn't tell you that they only fit a specific bolt pattern?
IMO, its a simple case of not checking into a new type of product. If they kept the information from you, was that information available through another medium? IE Google search.
Anyway, I am not annoyed at you.
Orpheus
member
13860 posts
1547 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 26th 2001
Location: Long Oklahoma - USA

Occupation: Long Haul Trucking
The best things in life, aren't things.
Posted by reaper47 on Sun Jan 28th at 7:05pm 2007
This is a smart comparison, Orpheus. Made me think, actually.
I don't know about Fords but it sounds quite monopolistic, also.
I think you'd agree that it's an unfair tactic by the company that creates an artificial "value" that doesn't really exist. Are the Ford bolts better than a standard bolts (note that standards are much easier for MP3s than for bolts)? No. It's only there to force the customer to buy new ones when the old ones are just as good. You're not paying for a value, you're paying because the company forces you to.
Well, I don't know about Ford wheels. But I know that MP3s (or AACs) have completely artificial locks that have no purpose whatsoever except for forcing customers to buy Apple. It's not even about protecting the copyright for the musicians (that's another topic).
It's true, as a simple guy all you can do is ask the (probably incompetent) salesman or search the internets before you buy. But a country can come up with laws for the company just like it can come up with laws for people (don't share MP3s or go to jail!!!1).
Good thing, IMO. It forces companies to invest in service and innovation rather than sitting back and forcing people to buy all the same parts over and over again.
Posted by mazemaster on Sun Jan 28th at 7:07pm 2007
You buy a CD from sony, except it won't play in your panasonic CD player - you need to buy a cd player from Sony.
You can imagine it would get pretty ridiculous if that happened with CD's. You'd have to buy a new CD player for each brand that makes CD's. A Sony CD player to play Sony CD's, A Toshiba CD player to play Toshiba CD's, a Panasonic CD player to play Panasonic CD's, etc...
The thing is, thats exactly what is happening with the online music/mp3 player business. It's about time someone put a stop to it.
EDIT: Also, the reason why people don't get outraged when their tires don't fit on different cars is because in that case there is a solid _technical_ reason why the tires can't work with all models. In the mp3 case, there is no such _technical_ reason, so it is simply vendor lock-in.
Posted by Orpheus on Sun Jan 28th at 7:28pm 2007
You buy a CD from sony, except it won't play in your panasonic CD player - you need to buy a cd player from Sony.
You can imagine it would get pretty ridiculous if that happened with CD's. You'd have to buy a new CD player for each brand that makes CD's. A Sony CD player to play Sony CD's, A Toshiba CD player to play Toshiba CD's, a Panasonic CD player to play Panasonic CD's, etc...
.
Now I am confused because the premise doesn't fit. The option of music is available elsewhere. Monopolizing CD's would seriously limit sales as well. The ONLY way it would work is if the CD manufacturing corporations got in league with the player corporations to corner the market.
Ipod on the other had, hasn't monopolized anything. They are only restricting access, which in turn restricts their market of sales.
I don't see the correlation Nick. Sorry.
However, my wheel one fits, in so far as the explanation I mentioned. It doesn't exactly fit every example though but I couldn't come up with one we all could understand. We all need wheels. (Do not confuse wheels with tires. They are two totally different parts for auto's)
Orpheus
member
13860 posts
1547 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 26th 2001
Location: Long Oklahoma - USA

Occupation: Long Haul Trucking
The best things in life, aren't things.
Posted by reaper47 on Sun Jan 28th at 7:37pm 2007
Posted by Orpheus on Sun Jan 28th at 7:49pm 2007
Perhaps you should be asking why MP3's have the option instead of the music. It seems to me that Ipod is capitalizing on a method of music reproduction that until recently had no blocking methods. Perhaps its piracy policing, or the precursor of it.
Orpheus
member
13860 posts
1547 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 26th 2001
Location: Long Oklahoma - USA

Occupation: Long Haul Trucking
The best things in life, aren't things.
Posted by reaper47 on Sun Jan 28th at 8:05pm 2007
The day iPods can only play DRM-protected songs the sales would fall like a stone. Anti-piracy measures are a hypocritical argument from Apple's side.
Apple only cares about forcing iPod owners to buy another iPod for the next generation of players and not a product form another company. Even if it's better. That's just as unfair as pirating, even moreso if you ask me.
Snarkpit v6.1.0 created this page in 0.0116 seconds.



