or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple criticized for iPod shuffle's new 'authentication chip'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple criticized for iPod shuffle's new 'authentication chip' - Page 4

post #121 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

You BS- if they're not better than why do you use them?
I use MDR-A35 - excellent headphones $15.

Dude I said I have used them before on my ipods because they are cheaper than buying the stock ones from Apple but they both sound the same to me.
post #122 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adjei View Post

Dude I said I have used them before on my ipods because they are cheaper than buying the stock ones from Apple but they both sound the same to me.

Dude- What happened to the ones it came with? Try the MDR-A35- tell me they sound the same.
post #123 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by ttupper View Post

We don't apply that same logic to any other aspect of the computing world. For example, Microsoft charges obscene amounts of money to be a member of their developer network, and their dev tools by themselves are very pricy. A single seat MSDN license is $10,000 dollars - that's what a corporate user pays. Yes, you heard me right: for my company to develop software for M$, we have to fork out $10,000 per developer seat.

This is completely false. The dev tools are very inexpensive ranging from free to $18K (before current discounts) for THREE years and that includes Team Suite AND MSDN Premium which isn't anywhere close to required. For anyone to do professional development the cost is no more than $249.99 from Amazon for Visual Studio Standard or if you're willing to put up with the limitations of Visual Studio Express...$0.

Actually, MS is currently offering an "switcher" discount so that VS 2008 Standard is $100 off and Pro is $250 off. So standard edition is only $149. Hardly obscene.

Quote:
Want to use TFS for integration and code manegement? Better be prepared to take it in the shorts, so to speak.

Only if you want to. Team Suite is not a requirement. Or for that matter that great at the moment IMHO.

Quote:
By contrast, Apple charges $99 for a developer license for iPhone and gives away xcode and the other dev. tools for free. Why aren't you screaming about how predatory MS is? By the logic flying around here, Microsoft ought to make these development systems available for free, wouldn't you think? After all, what right has MS to control or charge people for the tools and knowledge required to develop for their platform?

VS Express Edition: $0.
XNA Game Studio 3.0: $0.
XNA Creator Club: $99

Because they do make these development systems available for free.

Quote:
The whole thing just screams of people blabbing without really thinking, in my opinion.

Or folks spreading FUD. Like you.
post #124 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by xt500n View Post

soon there will be a lot of compatible headphones, just because apple builds a lot of shuffles- and people buy them, so other companies will pay whatever small fee apple is charging and they will make money too...
that's the way things go
companies innovate and if they are successful others will follow and pay fees.
apple has to pay fees for mp3 license to fraunhofer others will pay fees to apple, so what?

Maybe, maybe not. Yes, Apple builds a lot of Shuffles. But the number of shuffles built and sold, particularly 3G shuffles, absolutely pales in comparison to the headphone market as a whole.

And good headphones don't get a very large slice of the pie to begin with. I suspect that there will be a wide selection of crappy headphones that work with the shuffle, and they'll be artificially expensive. Meanwhile you won't be able to use better headphones with the shuffle.

And for some usage models, the shuffle will simply no longer be useful. I have my 1G shuffle plugged into my stereo in my garage with a headphone->RCA splitter. It's the perfect solution -- cheap and robust. Since I can't start music playing on the 3G shuffle without the headphones, that usage model is out.
post #125 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrochester View Post

I certainly agree that it has been over-engineered. I can't think of any appreciable gain from making the player any smaller than it already was - other than bragging rights - and the bizarre remembering how many clicks you need to make your player move forwards or backwards just seems infinitely less usable and intuative than the 5 buttons that came before it. Let's hope Apple quickly move on from this 'embarrasment'.

first post. was also motivated to register due to disappointment with the new shuffle design. crazy, i know, but i think i have romantic feelings for my current, shuffle, so any change hits home with me. this IS a great discussion.

i agree with the ilounge opinion, and those expressed here that the new shuffle is over engineered and unnecessarily complicated for it's general purpose/use.

i also agree with the person who theorizes that this control feature is something of a test balloon for apple. it WOULD be crazy to try something potentially disastrous on the iphone line.

i use my shuffle for running/biking/lifting. i insist on having the headphone cord behind me. i would therefore never buy a player on which i couldn't access controls while exercising.

the good news, as several pointed out, is that the current design will probably be available for quite some time.
post #126 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Perhaps you should:

Originally Posted by rain
I still prefer the original. 6 key selling features the old has over the new.

1. Use any headphone

2. Use as usb storage He means direct to USB.
You mean, "Stores data via USB flash drive" 3. Nice sound quality Not 2G nor 3G equals the original.
Funny my son and I just got them and they don't sound any different than the 10 other iPods we own. I even used my Sony NCs and it sounded no different. 4. Click wheel

5. Charge indicator Doesn't need a voice.
Like the Green. Orange and Red indicator lights 6. USB charging (can find a usb port anywhereAgain he means direct charge no dock or cable required.
Like it shows in the manual. Could you give an example where no cable is required? Why don't you read before you bark?

Funny. All the negative comments from those that never have seen them.
post #127 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by ttupper View Post

I just don't get this analysis. A fundamental question should be this: why should a platform, developed at great expense and with great effort by any entity, be open to development by any third party without some sort of fee?

We don't apply that same logic to any other aspect of the computing world. For example, Microsoft charges obscene amounts of money to be a member of their developer network, and their dev tools by themselves are very pricy. A single seat MSDN license is $10,000 dollars - that's what a corporate user pays. Yes, you heard me right: for my company to develop software for M$, we have to fork out $10,000 per developer seat. Want to use TFS for integration and code manegement? Better be prepared to take it in the shorts, so to speak. By contrast, Apple charges $99 for a developer license for iPhone and gives away xcode and the other dev. tools for free. Why aren't you screaming about how predatory MS is? By the logic flying around here, Microsoft ought to make these development systems available for free, wouldn't you think? After all, what right has MS to control or charge people for the tools and knowledge required to develop for their platform?

My point is this: Apple developed the platform, and financed that development, and Apple invested the time and effort to bring the product to market. Apple has a reasonable expectation to profit from that effort. Why should someone else, a headphone maker for instance, have a reasonable expectation to profit from Apple's platform without paying Apple some degree of royalty for the knowledge required to do so? The whole thing just screams of people blabbing without really thinking, in my opinion.

Earphones are not dependent of any particular platform, there is no reason for them to be. Due to the fact that they are devices you actually stick in a bodily orifice, earphones are a very personal piece of electronics that one chooses for a ton of different reasons that have been stated all over this thread. Since Apple doesn't make earphones that satisfy all of those different variables, why would you be so willing to give up the option to use earphones of your choosing just to use an ipod. I think Apple is floating this one out to see how well it goes over. What's next? Would you be OK with chips in all their computers that only allow the use of internal and external hard drives, RAM, video cards, monitors, desktop speakers, printers, network devices, etc., that Apple puts a sticker with a piece of fruit on it available only from them requiring proprietary cables, adapters, etc. to use them?

If you're OK with that, you're a dumb-ass. Should that day come, Dark Overlord Gates will start to become the recipient of my money.
post #128 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Dude- What happened to the ones it came with? Try the MDR-A35- tell me they sound the same.

Lost them but didn't want to pay Apple 30 dollars for the stock ones.
post #129 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post

Funny. All the negative comments from those that never have seen them.

Funny. Many people defending a product they've never seen.

Well, not really. It's almost always better to see and hold a device before you buy it. However, if you have half a brain you generally do a little research up front to see if it warrants the effort to do so. You don't have to hold a product in your hand to read a spec sheet, look at pictures, or watch a product video to know it's features and understand how it works, or see that it doesn't work with something you already own and want to use because you can plainly determine such from the available info from the seller showing it's fundamental features and design (and limitations). I've never seen my own heart but I know pretty much how it operates in laymen's terms.
post #130 of 239
123 delete me
post #131 of 239
I can't imagine these new ones selling than the older ones. I wouldn't be surprised if the next gen has buttons again, if apple ever had a reason to backtrack on a product, this is it.
post #132 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post

Perhaps you should do some due diligence before you open you mouth.

Wut?

If you read my post, it clearly indicates that i'm talking about built-in usb connector. Who wants to carry a dock and cables with them everywhere?
Maybe you should do some due diligence like tekstud suggested.

geez... failed flamer or what. lol
post #133 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

From mining Apple Stores data and Made for iPod licensing data, Apple has a pretty good idea of how many 3rd party headphones/earbuds are actually being sold for iPods. Though I only have anecdotal data, I think the reality is more likely that 20% (or less) of consumers choose to use a different headphone/earbud. And an even lower percentage of those who use the low-cost shuffle would shell out more dollars for another set of headphones.

Twenty percent (or less) is not insignificant. But since it's not the majority, they can F off?

Mining Apple Stores data and Made for iPod licensing data gives Apple an idea of what THEY sell in THEIR stores. It's not the best way to determine the sale of non Apple products sold over all. It may give you an idea of how many products there are available, but not their total sales from all sources. The fact that there are (as I posted somewhere before) over a hundred different sets of earphones by other mfg. sold on the Apple store seems to say there are at least enough being sold that doing so is profitable—kind of like Apple sales in general. Apple only has 10% of the market on computers and phones combined, Using your numbers, why do they even bother to exist?
post #134 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post

Funny. All the negative comments from those that never have seen them.

That's a really odd response. Do you really need to see the new ipod to know things like that you lose the controls if you use generic headphones?

For the most part those seem like valid points to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roc Ingersol View Post

It's funny. On the first day, all the spoken menu stuff was lambasted as useless and unnecessary fluff.

But now that people can't access those 'useless' features with their existing headphones, it's the end of the world.

Apple's clearly wrong in this instance. But damn if the life-cycle of hate here isn't amusing.

I don't get what you're trying to say. The spoken stuff is pretty silly, and a screen would probably be better. And you can't control the unit AT ALL without the headphones. I don't see how the two points are contradictory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

The usuals are whining now, but I bet someday all mobile devices requiring headphones will use such controls.

You think this is the start of a trend of devices with no buttons on them? I bet not.
post #135 of 239
123 delete me
post #136 of 239
I think you're wrong here, but I admire the fact that you seem to have an argument and have made up your own mind about things. Too much of this thread is being dominated by trolls like teckstud and his alt accounts and that contributes exactly zero to any real discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by action trousers View Post

... i see lots of shuffles clipped on sleeves, waistbands, sportsbra straps, even hats, and though this is my anecdotal experience, i do pay attention as i am a product designer, in all those spottings seems like most folks are using aftermarket headphones. all my runner friends use some variation of an over-the-ear-clip design, claiming the ipod ones don't stay put. i do think the dollars will do the talking and i anticipate seeing an article in the not too distant future declaring the shuffle the most returned item in apple's yard.

I would argue that what you see here has nothing to do with any assumed poor quality of the iPod earbuds, it's just about making them stay in your ears instead of the "hanging" design of the basic earbuds. The "over-the-ear" type are well known to have the worst sound quality in general and also the most "leakage" to other people. I'm sure there are few people who haven't been driven crazy by some old guy on the bus or train that has the over the ear type thinking he is cool, when in fact he's just annoying. Personally, I use the Apple "in-ear" ones as they stay in your ears, have better sound than the original and also allow you to keep the volume significantly lower, which is much better for your ears.

I think you are going over the top with this part:
Quote:
Originally Posted by action trousers View Post

... this is the hardware version of DRM, the young people most responsible for the growth of consumer electronics are getting more savvy each day, and they don't put up with crap like proprietary headphones. why do you think the cell industry decided to standardize chargers? we are at that point where certain aspects of devices need to be universal.

This is really nothing like "the hardware equivalent of DRM" in that it has nothing to do with forcing you to use any particular piece of hardware, nor does it create any actual incompatibility with any other piece of hardware.

I think that's a point that people are seriously overlooking here.

ANY headphones will work in the shuffle, but you will lack controls because there are no controls on the device. All headphones therefore actually work in exactly the same way as they always have. All this talk of introducing incompatibilities is exactly backwards. Apple has made a new type of headset (an innovation) and purposely made it so that the plug is backwards compatible with other older headsets. They didn't have to do that.

You will shortly be able to use either of the two new types of headsets (with the controls), on the entire iPod line, (most will work already). On the cheap end "budget" model iPod however, there are no controls for playback beyond "shuffle" and "play." That's a much more accurate way to look at the situation.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #137 of 239
Really guys lets not get worked up over nothing. This is possibly one of Apples better ideas that we have seen in recent times. In the end I'd be surprised if this improvement adds more that a $1.50 to the cost of a headphone set.

As other have stated I see this as a proving ground for the remote controls. Ideally they will port this capability to the next iPhone/Touch device. Hopefully the signaling is compatible with the mic input though there is a good possibility that they have simply repurposed the signal line. I really can really see this as being very popular on new devices like iPhone as it would allow you to keep the device in the pocket yet effectively control audio playback. For an iPhone it would be more desirable as you are far more likely to have the iPhone in a substantial pocket. Lets hop this does in fact work in combination with the mic input.

In the end there are a lot of people looking at this in a negative manner. Something I'm very willing to do when looking at the iMacs, but not with this new Shuffle. The new shuffle has many things going for it and this remote control is one of them. You do have to take a step back and look at it positively and also imagine how well this would work when ported to other new devices. In that vain it is an acceleration of the technical development of the head phone set and has even more to offer newer iPhones and other devices, if it get ported there.

Dave
post #138 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post

ANY headphones will work in the shuffle, but you will lack controls because there are no controls on the device. All headphones therefore actually work in exactly the same way as they always have. All this talk of introducing incompatibilities is exactly backwards. Apple has made a new type of headset (an innovation) and purposely made it so that the plug is backwards compatible with other older headsets. They didn't have to do that.

Did you read your post dude? It makes zero sense.
Exactly how do you play any music without the Apple headphones?

Are you suggesting that people carry 2 sets of headphones? One to get the music started... unplug it, plug in the next set so the music doesn't sound like shit.
Oh... oh... lets skip that track... unplug good headphones that don't sound like shit, plug in Apple headphones, hit the next track, unplug Apple headphones, plug in good headphones that don't sound like shit.

Yah... sounds like a great innovation. Real user friendly. .....

Anyways who else wants to see Hana naked?
post #139 of 239
What's funny with all of this outrage. Its likely that 3rd party headphones with these controls will become the best selling iPod headphones.
post #140 of 239
According to MacRumors the DRM chip is only for the "Made for iPod" thingy!
That means: No license=No label
M
Reply
M
Reply
post #141 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by rain View Post

Wut?

If you read my post, it clearly indicates that i'm talking about built-in usb connector. Who wants to carry a dock and cables with them everywhere?
Maybe you should do some due diligence like tekstud suggested.

geez... failed flamer or what. lol

Are you saying that wherever you go, you don't carry any connectors and expect that they will be universally available at your beckoning call?
post #142 of 239
I don't understand why I'm the first one asking this but Why do all these people own expensive earphones but not iPods?

I mean they are so upset that there being forced to by a new shuffle as they don't have a music player now, and only have $80. (apparently) but they have hundred dollar Shure earphones that they wont be able to use because they don't have a remote on them.

I just don't get it??
post #143 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by iName View Post

According to MacRumors the DRM chip is only for the "Made for iPod" thingy!
That means: No license=No label

Absolutely - talk about people over reacting to a piece of crap 'discovery' - some of the comments have been almost hysterical.

Chill out for gods sake.
Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equpped with 18,000 vaccuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vaccuum tubes and perhaps weigh 1.5 tons.
by Popular Mechanics
Reply
Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equpped with 18,000 vaccuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vaccuum tubes and perhaps weigh 1.5 tons.
by Popular Mechanics
Reply
post #144 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

That's a really odd response. Do you really need to see the new ipod to know things like that you lose the controls if you use generic headphones?

For the most part those seem like valid points to me.

Perhaps you don't have to seen them, but to suggest that the sound is poorer or most of the key features that are "missing" aren't if you did a little reading.

The fact that is has already been communicated that their will be third-party connectors so you can use virtually ant headphone you want really belies all the concern.

This is a $79 music player. Give it a rest.
post #145 of 239
This is fucking ridiculous. Fuck you, Apple. I've given this company tens of thousands of my dollars over the years, and this shit is what makes me regret it. I seriously can't believe there's people defending this. Get your heads out of your asses. There's NOTHING good about this, its simply a cynical money grab by Apple.

Its also pathetic and humorous how some here are trying to put a positive spin on this by suggesting that controls on headphones is somehow a new thing, and that Apple is being a technological trailblazer with this. At first I realized it may have been sarcasm/satire, then I realized it wasnt. You people arent doing Apple any favors by consistently defending and apologizing for their every move.

This is a bad, bad thing for consumers, and you should all hold Apple's feet to the fire, if you have the objectivity to do so.
post #146 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMHut View Post

Twenty percent (or less) is not insignificant. But since it's not the majority, they can F off?

Mining Apple Stores data and Made for iPod licensing data gives Apple an idea of what THEY sell in THEIR stores. It's not the best way to determine the sale of non Apple products sold over all. It may give you an idea of how many products there are available, but not their total sales from all sources. The fact that there are (as I posted somewhere before) over a hundred different sets of earphones by other mfg. sold on the Apple store seems to say there are at least enough being sold that doing so is profitablekind of like Apple sales in general. Apple only has 10% of the market on computers and phones combined, Using your numbers, why do they even bother to exist?

Your business acumen is simply stunning! What you and the other (some derogatory term that will be used to degrade my point ;-)) posters fail to comprehend is that your opinion is just that, YOUR opinion. It is worth next to nothing to anyone else and especially Apple. The implied belief that "you know what is best for Apple and if only someone would give you a break, you'd do a much better job than those idiots in Cupertino" is laughable.

You think that Apple did not do usage surveys, focus groups, number crunch sales stats all ways from Sunday before investing in this new shuffle? They are making tradeoffs all the time - size, vs. traditional controls, expandability vs. simplicity, etc. based on the markets they are attacking. Apple are taking a punt on this mix of form and function based on their market analysis and strategic objectives, not on what a bunch of blowhards on AI think.

What irks a lot of long-time posters here, is that the center of gravity for Apple is inexorably moving away from fanbois (like me), old school mac-heads, or even general geeks and will never return. That's why they cancelled MacWorld attendance (bummed), dropped consumer firewire (double bummed) etc. The vastly larger market Apple chases today doesn't care. The fact that you still do is not their problem. You won't buy a shuffle. No-one cares - not even Apple. They are betting (from their research) that for everyone who won't buy one for whatever reason, there are new buyers who will go - whoa, that's cool, I'll get me one of those. You have no influence on them.

It's fine to whine, (I'm doing it here) but keep some perspective. Nothing any of us says makes any real difference to reality of the situation. As someone already rightly said, "The market will decide". Your stake in that is $79 x the probability that you were ever going to buy one at all.

PS I won't buy a shuffle - I only use my own earphones - but I would deffo get an adapter when they inevitably come out (hopefully to use on my iPhone).
post #147 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by rain View Post

Did you read your post dude? It makes zero sense.
Exactly how do you play any music without the Apple headphones?

Are you suggesting that people carry 2 sets of headphones? One to get the music started... unplug it, plug in the next set so the music doesn't sound like shit.
Oh... oh... lets skip that track... unplug good headphones that don't sound like shit, plug in Apple headphones, hit the next track, unplug Apple headphones, plug in good headphones that don't sound like shit.

Yah... sounds like a great innovation. Real user friendly. .....

Anyways who else wants to see Hana naked?

Music starts by itself...
If you don't like that song why did you put it on there in the first place???
post #148 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMHut View Post

Explain how it makes sense to design a product you cary attached to yourself that requires a remote control.

If you've got said product inside your coat, or your pocket, or strapped to your arm, and you want to leave it there and actually control it without actually having to look at it?

There, that wasn't so hard, was it? Anyway, it's not a REMOTE control. It's THE CONTROLS.
Multiplex is an online comic strip about the staff of a movie theater.
Reply
Multiplex is an online comic strip about the staff of a movie theater.
Reply
post #149 of 239
Where's the complaint about charging through the mic port? That means you have to use Apple's Dock like the prior shuffle. What's that? I hear nothing from the peanut gallery. Oh you don't "have" to buy a dock because one came with it. Oh.... Kinda like the headphones. Oh, but you don't like the headphones... Well give it about 1 month and there will be 10 different manufacturers offering them. Then you will have freedom. Oh, you want to use your $120 headphones you already bought. Well, Can I show you the iPod Nano? It's $70 more, but maybe that is the iPod for you. You seem like a serious audiophile anyway, and would more than likely enjoy the freedoms of a visual interface to get to your music anyway.

Me, I personally would use these for mowing the lawn or working out, where I want the smallest iPod, and can just click on the wire to change songs. Yeah, they might not be the best headphones, but they are free, and I'm only using for an hour. I'll use my iPod Touch with my Bose headphones on the plane. I like watching TV shows and movies when I'm stuck on a plane anyway.
post #150 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMHut View Post

Mining Apple Stores data and Made for iPod licensing data gives Apple an idea of what THEY sell in THEIR stores. It's not the best way to determine the sale of non Apple products sold over all.

"Made for iPod" licensing data includes sales of non-Apple products sold anywhere.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #151 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by rain View Post

Did you read your post dude? It makes zero sense.
Exactly how do you play any music without the Apple headphones?

Doood!

You plug in any set of headphones and wait for like ... a second, and the music will play.

The shuffle itself has a hardware button for "shuffle" or "play straight through." According to what I've read, this works with any headphones. Considering most people buy a shuffle because they just want to hear a shuffled version of their library or playlist, I'd think this is pretty much the same way it always worked.

There is no "incompatible" new headphone or headphone jack here. The new headphones can be used on old players but they lose the new features (the wire controls). The older headphones (no wire controls) can be used on the new player and neither lose nor gain anything. Because the *player* no longer has controls, you lose the controls by using an old headset on a player that has no hardware controls, but Apple has carefully arranged it so that even then, you can still *use* the old headset if you want to. They also made the old shuffle still available for those that are really peeved. This whole controversy is manufactured BS.

Just so you know, here you reveal yourself as someone not even worth replying to. If you want to actually have an intelligent debate about this stuff, you might want to reign in your "inner teenager" a bit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rain View Post

... Anyways who else wants to see Hana naked?
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #152 of 239
In my Gollum-like conversations with myself about replacing my still-functioning iPod mini, it's looking more and more like the Bad Gollum is the one wanting me to buy.

BAD G: We wants it, my precious. We wants it.

GOOD G.: But they're sticking us with something that means that only headphones they approve will work on our iPods. That's like buying a Ford that'll only run if you buy Ford tires. That's not right!

BAD G: We wants it my precious. We wants it.

GOOD G: But if we let them get away with this, what else will they DRM: hard drives, laptop batteries, video cables?... Oops they did that one already.

BAD G: We wants it my precious. We wants it.

GOOD G: But remember what The Master said:

Three iPhones for the Elven-kings under the sky.
Seven iPod shuffles for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone.
Nine iPod nanos for Mortal Man doomed to die,
One DRM for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the land of Cupertino where the lawyers lie.
One DRM to rule them all, One DRM to find them,
One DRM to bring them all and in the courtroom bind them,
In the land of Cupertino where the lawyers lie.


BAD G: We wants it my precious. We wants it.

--Michael W. Perry, author of Untangling Tolkien
post #153 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMHut View Post

Twenty percent (or less) is not insignificant. But since it's not the majority, they can F off?

Don't really know what is driving your tone, since Apple has already allowed other headphone makers to make headphones for the shuffle.

Pure speculation, but it's highly likely that such headphones/controllers with VoiceOver would be usable with the next-gen iPhones and iPods, so Apple sees no need to rush third parties into this since its not yet ready to divulge what those next-gen iPhones and iPods are.

It's quite likely that we can't see the whole picture, but that the shuffle is just the beginning of a wholesale change to the way all future iPods can use headphones; altho its required for the shuffle, it would be optional but highly desirable for all other iPods.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #154 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjthomps View Post

Where's the complaint about charging through the (headphone?) port? That means you have to use Apple's Dock like the prior shuffle. What's that? I hear nothing from the peanut gallery.

Actually, it's not a Dock, like with the second gen! It's just an audio jack > USB cable. It's brilliant.

I wish my second gen shuffle had one of those, because the little dock with it is an accident waiting to happen, with that oddball shape and the audio jack just sticking out like that.
Multiplex is an online comic strip about the staff of a movie theater.
Reply
Multiplex is an online comic strip about the staff of a movie theater.
Reply
post #155 of 239
Perhaps you should have done your research before writing a 2,220 word essay.

The chip is not about DRM. Apple says you are free to use any headphones and controllers you want.

I find it hysterical that someone did a tear down, everyone assumed it was DRM, and then millions of bits and hours have been wasted in the past day until Apple responded with what the chip does.

Pretty sad and pathetic for a normally good site.
post #156 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

Get your heads out of your asses. There's NOTHING good about this, its simply a cynical money grab by Apple.

I agree this is a way for Apple to make more money. At the same time a remote control on your headphones is a great function and Apple may have figured out a better way of doing it.

Quote:
Its also pathetic and humorous how some here are trying to put a positive spin on this by suggesting that controls on headphones is somehow a new thing, and that Apple is being a technological trailblazer with this. At first I realized it may have been sarcasm/satire, then I realized it wasnt. You people aren't doing Apple any favors by consistently defending and apologizing for their every move.

Everyone knows Apple did not invent this concept. What Apple has invented is their own proprietary way of implementing this concept. It may prove to be a superior solution in comparison to others, we have to wait and see.

Quote:
This is a bad, bad thing for consumers, and you should all hold Apple's feet to the fire, if you have the objectivity to do so.

Its not bad if it actually provides a better remote than others.
post #157 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by ttupper View Post

This is where your argument goes south. You assume Apple's intent is to prevent someone else from making hardware for their platform, yet you have NO evidence to support that position. You seem to think the intent is to force you to use Apple headphones, rather than to force competitors to pay Apple in order to produce headphones that can be used with Apple's platform. And to be totally blunt, you don't even know if any of the above is the case; All you have, in fact, are a lot of rumors and a hot head.

What could be happening here is this: Apple wants to extract some money from firms that want to profit from their platform. That is not the same as "Apple wants to be the only manufacturer of headphones." If you can't see that, I'm not sure what I could say that could help you... but may I say that I think your position is myopic.

Agree mostly but rather than Apple extracting money from headphone makers, it could be that the headphone makers are working with Apple in this, as this Apple change will drive another round of headphone purchases for those who want to use the new controls on the shuffle now (and on any iPod/iPhone in the future).
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #158 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

This is fucking ridiculous. Fuck you, Apple. I've given this company tens of thousands of my dollars over the years, and this shit is what makes me regret it. I seriously can't believe there's people defending this. Get your heads out of your asses. There's NOTHING good about this, its simply a cynical money grab by Apple.

Its also pathetic and humorous how some here are trying to put a positive spin on this by suggesting that controls on headphones is somehow a new thing, and that Apple is being a technological trailblazer with this. At first I realized it may have been sarcasm/satire, then I realized it wasnt. You people arent doing Apple any favors by consistently defending and apologizing for their every move.

This is a bad, bad thing for consumers, and you should all hold Apple's feet to the fire, if you have the objectivity to do so.

Don't know why I even bother replying to a troll like this, but you are dead wrong in every aspect here.
  • It *is* a new thing, Apple has a patent on it.
  • The chip is in the control to process the signals, not for DRM or anything else.
  • you can't make accesories for iPod without a license

The licence gives you the right to use their chip (that they designed and is used for the patented thing that they do where the controls are in the cable). The cable controls literally would not work if the chip wasn't in there doing the thing that makes it work.

There is no DRM here, no "hardware DRM" (whatever that even means), and nothing happening that is even remotely unusual in regards third party licensing and accessories. It's just a slow news day and iLounge and Ars and a few others have decided to manufacture a story out of thin air for the occaision.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #159 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

This is fucking ridiculous. Fuck you, Apple. I've given this company tens of thousands of my dollars over the years, and this shit is what makes me regret it. I seriously can't believe there's people defending this. Get your heads out of your asses. There's NOTHING good about this, its simply a cynical money grab by Apple.

Its also pathetic and humorous how some here are trying to put a positive spin on this by suggesting that controls on headphones is somehow a new thing, and that Apple is being a technological trailblazer with this. At first I realized it may have been sarcasm/satire, then I realized it wasnt. You people arent doing Apple any favors by consistently defending and apologizing for their every move.

This is a bad, bad thing for consumers, and you should all hold Apple's feet to the fire, if you have the objectivity to do so.

1. Apple's business model does not include "money grab" tactics, they are into creating customer loyalty. They try to build innovative, dependable products and earn their good reputation.

2. There is nothing bad for consumers here because consumers have dozens of other players that they can purchase instead.

3. Just because you have spent x-amount of cash on Apple products doesn't mean you know what type of devices other people want.

4. Always the same bottom line. Don't like the new <insert product name> don't buy it.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #160 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post

Are you saying that wherever you go, you don't carry any connectors and expect that they will be universally available at your beckoning call?

why carry a connector when its on the unit?

Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple criticized for iPod shuffle's new 'authentication chip'