[Dan Frakes]

Quote:

---

As for DRM devices, I don't use a Zune, so you might be right, but I was under the impression that my N95 would support any standard Windows Media DRM file.

---

The problem is that there isn't a single "Windows Media DRM" format. Besides the fact that Zune Marketplace Windows Media DRM is different from Plays For Sure Windows Media DRM, even within the latter there are different restrictions the content provider can apply to a given media file that dictate how it can be played.

Quote:

---

It does seem kind of odd that the "best iPod ever" didn't have the ability to use music files as ringtones, and it doesn't speak much to Apple's consumer-friendly credentials.

---

See my previous messages. I'd bet money that Apple didn't make that an explicit feature because, as a music reseller, they had to be concerned with how such a feature would affect their relationships with the music labels. But third-party developers have made it possible.

Quote:

---

For sure, Apple has been doing its best to close down the "hacks" with each new software update.

---

I disagree. iPhone software updates do require you to re-hack your iPhone, but the updates have done nothing to actually prevent such hacks. I suspect the reason they require you to re-hack is that the updater checks to make sure the iPhone software is in a "known state" before updating. As Mac users know, updating corrupted software is a Bad Thing, and to the updater, a hacked iPhone probably looks like a corrupted iPhone. So the updater restores the iPhone to its original software before updating it.

[Axl]

Hear Hear

[detorn]

For years I've been listening to the bunbled software arguement... My question is, if you buy a computer without a browser, email client, text editor, etc. aren't you just getting a paper weight? If IE and Safari didn't come bundled with the OS, you wouldn't even be able to get to FireFox! (I know you can do it via terminal, but who wants to go through that). Netscape didn't die because of microsoft, it died cause after they realized they couldn't charge people for software that should obviously be free they stopped innovating and the browser became bulkware.

[heisetax]

Quote:

---

Thank you Dan for articulating the true much better than most of us could.
I'd also like to add, to the faulty argument of the "Son's Dad" losing his purchased songs from iTMS by buying a competitor's player. iTunes does allow you to burn a playlist converted to regular MP3s that WILL play in any other player.

---

This sounds like a way that would keep Apple out of hot water. If you are free to copy your iTunes Music Store to a DRM free CD or DVD thne what control does Apple have?
Bill the TaxMan

[heisetax]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

As I mentioned in the article, the reason for this seems obvious to me: unlike Apple, the manufacturer of your current phone isn't a music retailer and doesn't have to maintain a relationship with the music industry. There's no way the music industry would have allowed Apple to provide "free" ringtones or to include in iTunes a way to make ringtones out of your music without a fee. For-fee ringtones are by far the most profitable product the music industry has right now.

---

Hmm. The manufacturer of my phone is Nokia. It will be interesting to see if and how they change the ringtone support now that they are trying their hand at a music service. It is interesting to note that, apart from DRM files, they did actually manage to pull off pretty decent integration with iTunes with their most recent N-series devices.
As for DRM devices, I don't use a Zune, so you might be right, but I was under the impression that my N95 would support any standard Windows Media DRM file. I use an iPod (soon to be Touch) as my main media player, so I don't really dabble too much with the music feature of my phone (and don't own any WM DRM files), other than to confirm that I have a full selection of potential ringtones available. Ironically, the ringtones I installed were from CDs that I ripped to AAC using iTunes. It does seem kind of odd that the "best iPod ever" didn't have the ability to use music files as ringtones, and it doesn't speak much to Apple's consumer-friendly credentials.
As for the DRM-free files, I agree it's probably more of a bug than a conspiracy that caused them to have glitches at first, rather than an attempt at circumventing the competition. Nevertheless, what's unintentional can breed the intentional in future releases. For sure, Apple has been doing its best to close down the "hacks" with each new software update.

---

That's why many times a new software version is not an upgrade for everyone. That is why I do not like the way that Apple forces you to update to a new software version if you purchase new Apple software. It makes their software support easier, but eliminates the use of some software that has better, less cumbersome & restrictive features.
Things like I have the Mac OS 10.4 system disk. Then I purchase my new Intel Mac. That DVD becomes useless as is on my new Intel system. Windows does not have that restriction.
Bill the TaxMan

[joebot]

Quote:

---

I've uninstalled pretty much everything that comes with the OS (Outlook Express, Windows Messenger, etc) without any issues. I could also uninstall IE if I wanted to, but I like to have all browsers on my system to compare formatting.

---

Um, no. On my PC at work, AutoCAD occasionally crashes on me when I attempt to print a drawing. The error dialog that pops up on the screen is very clearly identified as "Internet Explorer." I don't even use IE for anything, I use Firefox. I never use IE.
That to me reveals some pretty tight integration into the operating system. It isn't "just another application" the way that Safari is. Microsoft has stated as much explicitly, that IE is part and parcel of operating system internals and is some kind of strategic advantage. (Stupidly. The rest of us think it's a security hazard.)
*
Nice rebuttal, Dan. I think you're right on with all points.

[dbater]

So this guy is the final say? I don't think so. When I read his article, I didn't agree with most of his points but read it to the end. I also don't always agree with articles on MacWorld Blog either, it's an opinion, nothing more.

[pauldfullerton]

In my opinion, the real difference between Apple and Microsoft (and most other IT companies in the world) is their commitment to good design, both aesthetic and functional. They obviously think very carefully about what their products should do and how they can be integrated with their other products before letting the programmers loose with sloppy programming techniques that cause functional inconsistencies, poor user experiences and security holes.
And a key reason why Apple can keep designing good products is that they have kept tight control of both hardware and software architectures - something that Microsoft never did, and something that 'unthinking' IT professionals have always used to unfairly criticise Apple.
Apple's competitors need to stop bitching about Apple's successes and get back to the basics of good design which is fundamental to the process of innovation. Spending piles of money on marketing and litigation is a complete waste of time and money if your products are poorly designed and poorly implemented. And there are so many crap IT products out there. Apple is not perfect, as I'm sure Jobs keeps reminding his staff, but at least it can be relied on to do a much better job of product design than its competitors. And for that reason I will continue to buy Apple products in preference to any others.

[Gatesbasher]

Quote:

---

Apple charges you for ringtones. They have modified iTunes to prevent a simple hack around the ringtone. This sums up Apple for me today. I love the computer and the OS, but I would never purchase a low quality iTunes song that is overpriced. I don't want Apple telling me who my cell phone carrier is, I don't want them messing with my hardware so that something as stupid as a ringtone becomes more difficult.

---

You have to pay full price again for 30 seconds of a song you already own because according to the record labels, your ringtone is a new "public performance" that has to be purchased again. If this is allowed to stand as a point of law, what's to keep them from charging you afresh every time your phone rings? Personally, I'd pay not to be subjected to this annoying noise a hundred times a day. How come the old cell phones that weighed as much as a brick made a little chirp nobody could hear, but these tiny new appliances can fill a concert hall with hopelessly distorted auditory sputum?

[folklore]

Quote:

---

Things like I have the Mac OS 10.4 system disk. Then I purchase my new Intel Mac. That DVD becomes useless as is on my new Intel system. Windows does not have that restriction.

---

That depends on exactly what it is you're talking about.
If you're talking about the retail 10.4, AFAIK it doesn't support Intel Macs. That's more to do with the change in processor architecture than anything else - all Intel Macs ship with 10.4 and restore DVDs, so why would anyone need a retail 10.4 DVD that worked on Intel Macs? Why bother to produce them?
If what you're talking about is system restore discs (or restore partitions, for that matter) in the Windows world, then they typically are limited to just the machine that they initially came with. Legally, if not technically... they're usually an OEM license.

[dicklacara]

There are many legalistic definitions of a monopoly and anittrust-- oddly (thank God) it is not necessarily related to market share:
1) A merger of supermarket chains (in the 60's) was prevented, by the Feds, as being monopolistic because it would result in a combined 7% market share.
2) In the 70's IBM was ruled not to be monopolistic even though it held 76% of the maimframe (typo intended) computer market.
In these cases it came down to "intent" and "practices":
The supermarket merger was prevented because the objective was (determined to be) to gain control of a market (segment) and control poducts, prices, etc. to the detriment of the consumer.
IBM was ruled OK because they attained their market position by providing superior products, services and marketing-- all of which were pro competition and good for the consumer.
I have my own opinions as to MicroSoft's products, prices and practices (and the Justice department does too).
But, Dan, you have captured the essence of Apple's approach to the "marketplace":
"You dont buy an iPhone because it has a touchscreen. You buy an iPhone because its touchscreen, its hardware, and its technology work together the way no other phone ever has. Because its interface is head and shoulders better than any other phone on the market. Because its functional where similar products arent. Because its so damned cool."
Excellence, by definition cannot be monopolistic or anti-consumer.
Dick Applebaum

[doglesby]

..that I didn't read that story. I hate seeing someone shoot his own argument in the head.

[sojurn]

Quote:

---

Um, no. On my PC at work, AutoCAD occasionally crashes on me when I attempt to print a drawing. The error dialog that pops up on the screen is very clearly identified as "Internet Explorer." I don't even use IE for anything, I use Firefox. I never use IE.
That to me reveals some pretty tight integration into the operating system. It isn't "just another application" the way that Safari is.

---

That's right it is part of the operating system. It's a component that 3rd party developers can use, in the same way that an Editbox, Button, Listbox, Toolbar, are.
3rd Party Applications can use the IE engine to build their own browser and sell it commercially with no royalties to MS, it is part of the Operating System. And in my opinion I see no good reason why a modern OS should not have the in-built capability to parse and display web documents.
The ability for the user to open a web document in explorer as seamlessly as using a local document, was never a concern for consumers. What was a concern for users and web developers was that Netscape was a bug ridden god awful browser.

[xtopher]

it's 'to wit', not 'to whit'. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
other than that, i couldn't agree more. in fact you pretty much made all the points in response that i thought of posting the other day when the first article went out--and then decided someone else would probably do it for me.
yes, apple's role in the world is shifting; no, those weren't valid arguments for apple becoming the new microsoft. as if.