Quote:
Originally Posted by
malax 
Wow.
Steve was nice to respond at all. I probably wouldn't have. He certainly didn't have to.
It really is no big deal. The Web page can say "formerly called iPodRip" and there will be no confusion.
Frankly, they are lucky the lawyers didn't come done on them years ago for the functionality of the software. It's a feature that Apple could have easily included, but specifically didn't (presumably to make it harder to use iPods to steal music--to not make it easy for me to lend you my iPod and suck off all the music). It's an odd situation because it's actually good for Apple that this app exists, but they can't be seen to be endorsing it.
Anyway, Steve handled it fine. Like someone else pointed out, any "assholeness" you detect in the message is coming from the reader.
i love steve
no mistake there
i just simply see apple changing day by day
how ever micro that change may be .
as for odd situation you mention it helped sell sold tons of 2nd /3rd gen ipods >> this app yet allowed apple to sell with clean hands as regards to RIAA .
i agree with you that this is no big deal either way and the writer did go way over board with his plea and his praise.
this shareware company provided a service that allowed people's to take their songs from their ipod to rip to their computers
HENCE the correct name IPODRIP .
The name should have been allowed to stand or the inventors should have been paid $17,000 per lettrer of said name and or a single item top five placement in the APP store for 38 months .
APPLE RECEIVED an incredible amount of free value from these shareware dudes.
steve knows better . or he did at one time