Discussion in 'General Chat' started by Uridium, Sep 9, 2007.
What do you think?
Portable DAP section methinks Don't get why its called MP3 section as well
Anyway, iTunes has been one of the main reasons I have not bought an iPod due to a bad experience with Sony and SS. Other factors was features, such as gapless which incidentally I had in my DAP 4 years ago until suddenly Apple "innovated" the market
The biggest shame is that since 5.5G, Apple have locked out Rockbox developers
oohh stick subject that'll probably get heated and locked?...heh
my 2p before that happens......lol
Gates deserved his success because whilst he was monopolising and a bit of a bully, he managed to do one very good thing, united the world......if computer systems ran on too many varying o/s's and whatnot, the WWW would have had a far harder time progressing to where it is now...so for that im quite honestly thankful, and yes im aware its not necessarily Gates own inventions that led to it, but his pulling everything under a banner worked....perhaps it may have worked anyhow, but i dont think it would have been as quick........but heres the crunch, MS was basically trying to ground the basic (if you excuse the pun) network together......far as i can tell they never attempted to limit what you did on the network.......now on to Apple...
Apple are trying to limit the fun side of what you do....it has to be through Apple.....its not like MS, they were mainly working on the business side of application and general netiquette......Apple are playing with music and movies...and thats where it gets me.......I like high res music, even on my PDA/phone I use high quality recording.......which i get from my CD's.....if CD's get completely outmoded by downloads in the near future, are Apple going to do high res downloads?....cant see it myself, they know a sizeable majority of their users will happily sit with 128kbps.....and if they did offer hi-res, bet your bottom dollar they'll charge the earth for it......this is where im not too keen on Apple's play in the market here......im going to be held to ransom on something thats basically an enjoyment product......MS simply held folks to ransom on a business application level......well thats business, once i leave the office behind i essentially couldnt care less what the mechanics behind something are.....but when it affects my enjoyment out of work then i'm a little nervous...
I dont mind a company doing very well and leading a market or even having a rather large lions share, so long as its beneficial to all when it comes to downtime enjoyment.....Apple are threatening that and i dont like it.....but what can ya do.....I already dont buy iPods, mainly because I prefer to have just one device on me to be phone and mp3 player, so why dont i buy an iphone, simple, my MDA Vario 2 lets me do what i want on it, all sorts of applications available to use, official and third party and very little hassle implementing them.....iphone im gonna be kind of limited and if i ever switch to something else and it doesnt use itunes then i'll have spent a bundle on something i cannot use....
ok, next person
After skim reading that, it looks to me as he just doesn't like iTunes. Nonintuitive? I'd take iTunes anyday over Media Player or Winamp.
The article is ok but saying because Microsoft put WiFi in the Zune, they're the innovator and Apple merely copied is nonsense. The iPod was always going to WiFi eventually so you could buy songs off iTunes, they may have done it after Microsoft (who's so called innovative Zune has been a disaster and it's WiFi poorly implemented - "hey, let's share a song! but we can only listen to it for 4 seconds before it expires! Oh mayan it don't matter bahoy! It lahooks guyud!"), but that doesn't mean they've stolen/copied the idea. Yes Apple are massive now, but saying they just sit back and just exclusively steal other peoples ideas is crazy talk. The LG Prada phone is reasonable, but c'mon, it's no iPhone and it's no Nokia N95. It might have a touch screen, which Apple were already doing themselves anyway, but it hasn't got much else going for it.
The iTunes argument however I understand, yes, you have to use it. I personally don't care because I love the software, however I accept that some people don't like it and would like to use other software. But comparing the iPod itself to Windows is silly. MS made the agreement with many manufacturers and therefore if you went to HP, you got Windows, you go to IBM, you got Windows etc. But if you want an MP3 player, you can go anywhere you like. If you want an iPod, you go to Apple. They aren't forcing you to buy an iPod.
I would also suggest to Knyght that it isn't necessarily Apple that are killing the CD, but digital downloads are. That you could attribute to Napster all those years ago, it just so happens Apple make the nicest all in one solution for legal digital downloads these days, therefore the most successful. Personally the music I buy is a mix of iTunes and CDs. I listen to the music on my computers, stereo and iPods. To be fair anyway, if I buy CDs now I rip them to my computer and then the CD gets put away in a cupboard somewhere to rarely be seen again.
Apple recently started offering DRM free, higher bit rate (256) downloads from EMI and other record companies will eventually no doubt follow suit, so to answer that question, they already *are* offering higher quality downloads... not a massive number as of yet, but the time will come. I hope so anyway!
Well high quality downloads would be lossless. That's why I still buy CDs
In Apple's defence, the author also needed to shift some of the blame to the music execs too. But I would still like software to be optional and for all players to be drag+drop
No No No No No No and No.
Curse Microsoft, long live Apple.
Well, I guess "high quality" is a term that restricted by one's personal standards I guess so that's fair enough
I really don't see why as both the concept and implementation of the web are OS independent - except of course for the parts that MS have made IE specific, by deviating from the published standards.
The only way that Gates has 'united the world' is in a shared vulnerability to virus producers.
Good argument you have there
Errr - you are aware that the whole power of the web is that it is machine independent and can be used on any platform with a suitable browser?
You might also want to consider that a majority of the back-end infrastructure of the internet runs on non-MS OSes. Typically Linux/variations of Unix.
You might also want to remember that MS tried to monopolise the browser market by integrating their awful IE with Windows and received regulatory raps on the knuckles in both Europe and the US.
Apple will never be bigger than Microsoft, unless it achieves almost 90% coverage of all PC and software usage in the entire world!
Unless the head of Apple decides to start being sneaky, just as Microsoft has been accussed of in the past, then Apple will always be the computer equivalent of Skoda, which is supposedly as good as Volkswagen. That is to say, Apple will always be seen as inferior, except for a tiny percent of followers who know otherwise.
But Apple is harming itself by trying to take on Microsoft. It needs to build-up its software and hardware first, and make things backwards compatible, so that people who have PC systems or software, don't have to buy replacement items just to convert to Apple. Just as with the war between Betamax and VHS, one dominated the other, and the other was left to die alone in a grave, and is only occasionally fondly remembered by a select few.
PC people aren't going to convert to Apple unless there is something really beneficial for them to do so. Ditto Apple people won't revert back to Microsoft products, because they have "seen the light" so-to-speak.
Just my 14 cents worth.
I see where you're going with your sentiments but I don't think your points are quite right Pooch.
The numbers suggest PC users (look at Macbook sales) are turning to Apple in their droves! They're the third biggest computer manufacturer in the US I believe now. People always go on about how the aren't as big as Microsoft etc but people forget they are also gunning for the likes of HP and Dell as well.
I would also suggest that Apple are seen more AS the Volkswagen and that PCs with their from £30 prices are the Skodas of the story. Of course that's from an Apple biased user - me! heh.
Talking about compatibility between the two - I don't see quite what you mean. Software for PC should work for the Mac too and vice versa? It wouldn't work like that. What is feasible is having cross platform software or software on the Mac that can open software form the PC, and vice versa. And that is happening now. The interoperabilitiy of the two is actually pretty impressive.
So long as Leopard lives up to Mac OS X Tiger, they can keep gunning for Microsoft and Vista.
Now I could write an enite essay why this is true. But then it would only cause everyone to get into a fight over Apple & Microsoft + this thread going for about 20 pages or so.
So right here, right now. Lets agree to disagree.
I think what Apple do well is their marketing. I know many people who have ipods because it was an ipod. They don't realise that there are alternatives that are just as good with better value for money. I'm no Microsoft or Apple fan by a long way but MS are perceived as more complicated (how many vista versions?) and 'techy' vs the simplicity and consumer oriented nature of Apple products.
The way forward IMHO is browser based apps with simple viewers/editors for the various file formats. I'd rather have a great web app for managing audio files of any type, then use it to coordinate playing the files (which could be local or remote). Google have a load of APIs that support web services, offline working etc. Your issue then becomes what is the best device to run your browser and plugins. A lot of the OS is just not needed to do the majority of what people want to do. A device with a fast network connection, fast browser and small form factor with memory extensibility and outputs (video/audio) would be a great thing to have, whoever makes it.
so Steve Jobs must have learnt a lot from his mate Bill Gates :
[WARNING ... STRONG INNUENDO]
That would be like adding hydrogenated fat to caviar to make it attractive to connoisseurs of the Big Mac.
I think you may have overvalued here Pooch
Unix Sys Admin by Trade here...slightly OT but it is nice to see someone acknowledge this important but often overlooked fact.
Back on topic, I like what Apple have done with OS X. They have put a bright, shiny front end on a variant of BSD Unix which is user friendly (in my humble opinion) and most of all, reliable. I can fire up a terminal and all the Unix stuff I usually use at work is there.
I have been around Operating Systems in one form or another for almost 25 years and the one thing, above all others, which differentiates them for me is reliability. I need machines to run 24 x 7 x 365 and so far the only OS which has allowed me to achieve anywhere near that is Unix.
Will Apple be the new Microsoft? I certainly hope not.
Fair enough Also though my CDs are mine. Not very happy with suits trying to change the game in digital world
oh the infrastructure of the servers might not be windows based specifically, but what do you think is on almost every home PC? windows and IE (or a ISP's variant on IE)......IE may be clunky to those who understand how a computer works to the last bit of data, but to Mrs Silver Surfer who just wants to email her friend in the north, using a simple IE web browser is whats preferred.....you have to remember, nowadays the majority of folks using the web are NOT tech savvy......they know a few limited things, enough to get them by......thats what gates aimed for......
and yes, im aware apple are doing 256kpbs......that doesnt even compare to CD, let alone 24/96 hi-res discs......fair enough quality is a personal taste, but why should someone be restricted from getting their version of the quality?
I still fail to see how IE under Windows is any simpler than any browser under any other OS. The whole point is that it is pretty much transparent. And Windows didn't exactly achieve its popularity through the free choice of consumers did it?
I think you'll find that the only thing Gates aimed for was to make as much money as possible through monopolising a market with restrictive sales practices. He is no Francis of Assisi ... or Steve Jobs
The same arguments apply to CD vs vinyl and digital vs film photography. It would be interesting to see the results of blind testing with 128k, 256k and CD bit rates. And whatever the sampling quality, the future undoubtedly lies in digital distribution rather than circular bits of plastic.
Separate names with a comma.