Thoughts on Music

[Jessterw]

Interesting and, like his previous piece, not entirely untrue. It'd be a far better commentary if it wasn't so dripping with animosity and, in the previous article, some glaring historical inaccuracies. That's ignoring the ridiculous notion that DRM and Mac hardware/software integration are the same thing.

But I guess vehemently attacking Apple is the cool thing to do now. Knee jerk reactions at their best.

[Technoid]

Apple has made a buissness on attacking pc, and thats ignoring apple's way of interchanging Windows and "PC" whenever it suits them

And as history has tought us "integration" is relative and up for discusion

[Jessterw]

Apple isn't the only one who using Windows and PC interchangeably when it suits them. Just take a look at any of the PC vs. Mac discussions that have occurred on here. None of which has any bearing on what I was saying.

I'm not sure what your second comment about history and integration has to do with anything that was being said. I mentioned "Mac hardware/software integration" merely in regards to the author of the previously linked article ranting that it was DRM. You can substitute "integration" with "lock-in" or any other term you like, that wasn't the crux of the statement.

But I digress. All this arguing for arguments sake is becoming a repetitive exercise in futility.

[Jessterw]

Interesting article from Leonardo Chiariglione, head of MPEG and the Digital Media Project concerning Jobs' commentary and DRM itself...

http://www.chiariglione.org/contrib/060209chiariglione01.htm

[Jammrock]

The thing I found funny about the latest "Get a Mac" ad (the "Accept or Deny" bodyguard one), is that OS X has been doing that exact same thing for years. Maybe not to the extent that Vista does, but I've used OS X enough to know that those annoying little confirmation boxes pop up during admin tasks all the time. Seemed kind of hypocritical to me. Though things may have changed in the latest iteration of OS X.

[Jessterw]

Not much has changed in that regard. I think the difference is the manner in which OS X prompts you - a single password verification prompt that appears only on system changes that can affect the system as a whole - compared to what however Vista does it. I've not used Vista to any great extent (five minutes on a friend's system isn't really 'using') so I can't comment on it, but I've seen plenty of negative commentary on it from Windows users who have.

So the gripe isn't that Vista does it, but rather the manner in which it does it. Implementation is everything.

Obviously that's not something anyone not in-the-know is going to pick-up on. Oddly enough though, a lot of the people I know who do use Windows and have beta tested Vista got a kick out of the ad.


Side note: OS X does it in pretty much the same way that most *nix-based/like systems do it, which has a lot to do with the BSD underpinnings.

[Jammrock]

Vista is actually pretty similar to the OS X description you gave. There's a little shield on system tools and properties that can be used to change user and system settings on a whole. Those are the ones that give you the pop up, which seems pretty similar to OS X. I just think PC users complain about it because we are so used to being "an admin" and so having complete access to the system, no questions asked. So it's a tough switch for Windows users, but for Mac users it apparently commonplace so much that no one notices it.

Though my biggest gripe about UAC (User Account Control) is by disabling it the system automatically locks out certain parts of the system. For example, I have UAC disabled because it bugs the hell out of me. Post-disable I tried to install Adobe Reader 8, but I kept getting an error. After some research I found out that Vista prevents installation programs from running in the temp directory if UAC is disabled. So in order to install software that extracts to temp you have to re-enable UAC, reboot, install, disable UAC, reboot to get it working. Or find a way to extract the installer and run it from a non-temp location. But so far that's my biggest gripe with Vista security, but I'm a tweaker so it doesn't bother me.

Further research discovers that they do this because IE only allows web-based programs to write to the Temp dir to prevent malware and whatnot. With UAC enabled any program trying to sneak on the system will get a UAC prompt. But with UAC disabled (possibly by a worm or trojan) this would lift the security measure. So to add an extra layer they block programs from running off Temp.

[Jessterw]

Spoke to someone I know that is running Vista and his main gripe is that the UAC dialogs are system modal, as in they prevent you from interacting with the system until confirmed or cancelled. Apparently they run in a separate 'desktop' that is non-accessible outside the system itself. I can certainly see the benefit to that, and it sounds like it's a matter of security vs. convenience.

The other gripe is the frequency of the dialogs. On OS X the authentication prompts only occur when changing system settings and with some application installs (generally when they place files in system directories or alter aforementioned settings). While app installs generally prompt on each instance, setting changes (such as via the Preferences UI) often will remember the authentication within a session (of using Preferences).

So I've gathered that Vista isn't much different than OS X in regards to UAC, which is what I assumed based on reading before. The difference seems to be that Vista is almost anal about the security issue; not necessarily a bad thing all things considered.

I don't have much interest in actually using Vista, but I really need to find a way and some time to have a good long play with it. Too bad all my PCs are less than optimal Vista machines and I don't have an Intel-based Mac, so no fun there either.

[Dr Mordrid]

EMI dropping DRM....

EMI set to drag majors into DRM-free future

Steve Jobs: credit where very little credit's due

By Chris Williams
Published Friday 9th February 2007 11:39 GMT

EMI is close to removing rights management software from its digital music for good, in a move which would pile pressure on the rest of the recording industry to follow suit.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the London-based label took a strategy to digital music retailers in December, which included a demand for a multi-million dollar "risk insurance" fee. Predictably, many retailers told EMI to go forth and multiply.

The paper reports that EMI returned with new ideas late in January which, rather than asking to be paid for nothing, invited retailers to make advance payments on the music they wanted to sell. The shops' submissions were due back to the label yesterday, and EMI will decide whether to go ahead based on the total up front cash haul that dumping DRM would bring.

Understandably coy about the imminent decision, EMI refused to confirm the process, describing reports as "speculation".

That EMI will likely be the first major label to ditch DRM entirely is no great shock - it already announced it would no longer encumber its physical releases in January. It even trialled selling DRM-free MP3s of some of its top-selling artists back in summer 2006 through Yahoo! music. Those trials failed to bring the global music industry to its knees, so it would be more surprising if talks with other retailers weren't ongoing.

Happily for Steve Jobs though, his timing is impeccable; history will probably grant him much credit thanks to his media-baiting denouncement of DRM in an open letter earlier this week.

Warner, another of the four major record labels which together control around 80 per cent of the worldwide recorded music market, meanwhile told Jobs where he could stick his open letter. CEO Edgar Bronfman said the Apple supremo's ideas were "without logic and merit".

[Jessterw]

More thoughts on music...

The head of Yahoo Music and the CEO of SanDisk have both come out in support of DRM-free music:

http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?RSS&newsID=17184

http://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/mt/archives/2007/02/yahoo_exec_says.php

Of course, Yahoo has some history on speaking out against DRM, even if it's largely been limited to the developer blogs for Yahoo Music.

[az]

...and SanDisk make storage. Storage manufacturers of course want you to copy as much as you can, so you need more storage.

Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn.

[GNEP]

Reading the article Az linked, I've just come to a worrying conclusion: Texans are the Yorkshiremen of the US...

[az]

Stve vs Bill.

[Maggi]

I couldn't care less what Mr. Jobs babbles about digital music, as long as there's a RockBox ...

[Jessterw]

Stve vs Bill.

Bwahahaha