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 2

post #41 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

btw, you should know by now that the next iPhone and iPod touch will use these remote controls (with microphone added) and VoiceOver. If you remember, people complained that they had to take their iPhone and iPod touch out of their pockets in order to control the volume/song selection. Well, this is Apple's solution, debuting first on the shuffle.
.


There is a button on the side of it- why do you need to take it out of your pockets? Put your hand in your pockets.
post #42 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

btw, you should know by now that the next iPhone and iPod touch will use these remote controls

Yeah, but they won't be required in order to control playback.

I just think the minimalism went too far on this one. But the market will decide.
post #43 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

What media assault? The only story the media was interested in my neck of the woods was the exploding battery story.

How about toning down the rhetoric in these phantasmagorical stories until something is verified?

AI has ignore the universal bad press/pans this product received last week. Where is AI's review? Why is it taking so long?
post #44 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

In any event the EFF is going to loose a lot of credibility if they pursue this track as the chip has nothing to do with DRM. That is where DRM means Digital Rights Management. In the worst case all the chip does is implement a custom communications protocol to ride on the mic signal.

The EFF has turned into a bunch of knee-jerk reactionary lawyers. There doesn't seem to be anyone there to do any engineering analysis, or innovative thinking.
"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 #45 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Right_said_fred View Post

I just ordered a new shuffle as a gift. Since it is so very different from the previous version, which some people like because of the built in buttons, and no dongle to use other brand headphones, why can Apple not offer both styles? I hope this is not a dumb question has not already been answered.

A gift... that's so nice of you.... please send it FEDEX my # 345Q0938T21F002.

What a prince!
post #46 of 239
all Apple had to do is move the control down and leave a headphone input open.

anyone would be able to use any headphone they desire.

but why do something so logical.


post #47 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

There is a button on the side of it- why do you need to take it out of your pockets? Put your hand in your pockets.

Whiner: "Well, it depends on which way the iPhone happens to be oriented in my pocket, and I can't select the next song/playlist or go back, blah, blah, blah"
"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 #48 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by emulator View Post

and the problem is their headphone, earphone standard is down in the toilet. they sound crap compared to even the average earbuds around.

Which is why I see everybody wearing them and not 150 dollar ones.
post #49 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Only a Koolaid guzzlin Fanboy would buy this piece of garage anyway so the point is moot. They would buy a new pair of headphones every other week if told to do so.

http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/rev...rd-generation/

No way - I had no idea that Apple was selling parts of a garage ... and for $79 at that.

Anyway, since you were probably trying to say that it's garbage, I assume you have some basis on which to make that statement other than your own blind hate.

This just in ... only a Google tit-sucking fanboi would have any interest in Android ... it's utter trash. Why? Because I F-ING SAY SO!!!! See how easy that was???
MacBook Pro 15" 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB DDR3 SDRAM, 500GB HDD
Mac mini 2.26 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB DDR3 SDRAM, 320GB HDD
iPod 5th Generation, 30GB
iPhone 4, 32GB
Reply
MacBook Pro 15" 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB DDR3 SDRAM, 500GB HDD
Mac mini 2.26 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB DDR3 SDRAM, 320GB HDD
iPod 5th Generation, 30GB
iPhone 4, 32GB
Reply
post #50 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

AI has ignore the universal bad press/pans this product received last week. Where is AI's review? Why is it taking so long?

What about Walter Mossberg's review, I would take his over the rest of the useless whining blogs.
post #51 of 239
The product is going to bomb. Mark my words.
post #52 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Right_said_fred View Post

I just ordered a new shuffle as a gift. Since it is so very different from the previous version, which some people like because of the built in buttons, and no dongle to use other brand headphones, why can Apple not offer both styles? I hope this is not a dumb question has not already been answered.

You should cancel the order and order the prior model. You really weant this lemon? May I suggest you read all 9 pages of this unbiased review from the best iPod website around.

http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/rev...rd-generation/
post #53 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adjei View Post

What about Walter Mossberg's review, I would take his over the rest of the useless whining blogs.

Yes it figures you would look for a Koolaid drip and find it somewhere. Has Mossberg ever given an unbiased review of anything Apple?
post #54 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alonso Perez View Post

Yeah, but they won't be required in order to control playback.

I just think the minimalism went too far on this one. But the market will decide.

Agree on the required, and agree that the market will decide.

The innovation though is that it's the first mp3 player where you use it without touching it. It's the true fashion accessory; come Sept, it'll be available in a bunch of other colors.
"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 #55 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacGui View Post

I had no idea your "neck of the woods" was the barometer of the world.

http://www.google.com/search?client=...UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

You might want to do likewise.

Thanks thirteen post-boy.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #56 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Yes it figures you would look for a Koolaid drip and find it somewhere. Has Mossberg ever given an unbiased review of anything Apple?

Actually he has, Mobileme.
post #57 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by filburt View Post

Seconded. I doubt most of the complainers were actually interested in buying shuffle in the first place. Most of the actual buyers are either activity-oriented (e.g., gym, running) or looking for throwaway music device, only replacing earbuds when the included one is damaged or lost.

That's fine but what if, like with many people, Apple's earbuds don't stay in their ears? Some people just have the wrong ear shape and they fall out.

What if they are replacing an older iPod that died and want to use a favorite pair of headphones they already own?

On top of that the control scheme is totally unintuitive and not Apple-like at all. Apple things are supposed to be simple and easy. This is the opposite. It's a pointless gimmick that will sell only because it carries the trendy iPod name. But I don't think it'll sell that well. The next version will have buttons on the iPod itself.
post #58 of 239
I don't at all see what's wrong with the previous generation of Shuffle. I think it's the best iPod period, for what it is of course. I use mine only for the gym and personally don't see how people lug their big iPods on arm bands and such, looks like it's a pain.

I also don't use Apple headphones simply cause the in ear phones hurt after a while. But overall the design is perfect with the controls on the device itself. I'm totally confused why Apple wanted to make something that great...better.
13" MacBook 2.4ghz, 4g RAM, 500g Scorpio HD, 22" Samsung SyncMaster
Reply
13" MacBook 2.4ghz, 4g RAM, 500g Scorpio HD, 22" Samsung SyncMaster
Reply
post #59 of 239
Confirmation from Apple themselves you can't use other headphones, you just can't control the volume or change the tracks but the music will play:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-19518_3-10195943-238.html
post #60 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post

The product is going to bomb. Mark my words.

The new shuffle is here to stay.

Quote:
Originally Posted by voodooru View Post

all Apple had to do is move the control down and leave a headphone input open.

If it's not selling as well as expected, Apple will simply split the cable into two parts as voodooru says.
"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 #61 of 239
It was always going to be a risky decision to take the controls off the actual player. It seems like it would probably make more sense to have the controller and the actual headphones as separate units - i.e. the controller plugs into the headphone socket, and then any pair of standard headphones could plug into the controller.

I realise this is basically the way the third-party accessories will work, but they should probably do it by default. Standard iPod headphones have never been that great.
post #62 of 239
I believe the following comments are not biased by the fact that this is the first ipod I have seen which I do not like over its predecessor. That is a different discussion...

I agree that EFF could have shot first and asked questions later -- just because there is a chip does not directly lead to it being either DRM and/or an authentication chip. Quite frankly, I would assume there is some sort of chip in there, it is a little small of a space to have gears and levers ;-)

If for a moment we assume that the paranoia is justified -- even if it was the lesser form of paranoia that Apple will charge a licensing fee -- it bodes poorly for the entire ipod line. It is easy to say "why do you want to use your $300 headphones with a Shuffle?" However, it could not be an inconceivable leap for all future ipods to come with these headphones and it would be a great loss if Apple got greedy and required them to use these chip-enabled phones

And when Apple goes down this route, it does not always reach out to the third party manufacturers. Before Apple locked down the video port on the ipods, there were some great video options out there, but when the video signal required an authentication chip, many of these vendors did not bother to update their product. Likely they either got burned or were scared of chasing a moving target. So my Memorex iFlip video player is consigned to using my old iPod video, versus my newer Classic (frustratingly, the one with enough storage for a lot of video).

To a certain extent I think this shit storm (possibly about nothing) is a good thing as Apple needs to hear that they have to refrain from further locking the systems down.
post #63 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luca View Post

That's fine but what if, like with many people, Apple's earbuds don't stay in their ears? Some people just have the wrong ear shape and they fall out.

What if they are replacing an older iPod that died and want to use a favorite pair of headphones they already own?

On top of that the control scheme is totally unintuitive and not Apple-like at all. Apple things are supposed to be simple and easy. This is the opposite. It's a pointless gimmick that will sell only because it carries the trendy iPod name. But I don't think it'll sell that well. The next version will have buttons on the iPod itself.

Yeah it won't sell, just like the Macbooks weren't supposed to sell because of no firewire.
post #64 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adjei View Post

Which is why I see everybody wearing them and not 150 dollar ones.

and how much % listen to flac on those earphones?
post #65 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogerman2000 View Post

@macnyc- Finally someone on here with a logical response. @everyone else- All you reactionary dipshits calling this guy(ArcoshKobosh) an idiot deserve fanboy title.

Actually it's you who is being the idiot fanboy by defending Apple. Do you even know what fanboy means? We're the ones CRITICIZING Apple, which is pretty much ANTI-fanboy.

Back to the article, we're being reactionary because Apple has done this over and over again in the past. It has engineered an OS that can only be installed on its hardware. It engineered a Magsafe charger that nobody else is allowed to manufacture so MacBook owners must pay 2x more for a replacement A/C adapter than the market rates. It has engineered an iPod connector that any car or charger manufacturer must license or they can't interface.

We're reacting because, as above, Apple has a long track record of making accessories that are Apple-specific and not letting 3rd parties in on the game. They squelch competition. That's really not cool.
post #66 of 239
It's blatantly a chip that handles the remote control actions which are non-trivial (press and hold, etc) and then sends a (inaudible? pulse?) signal to the player to denote what action was performed.

Whaaa that it's new and other headphones don't support it. Boo to Apple for not just making that controller have a 3.5 mm headphone socket on the end out of the box.
post #67 of 239
They used the term "authentication chip", but there was nothing indicating they had actually done their homework and proved that the chip has anything to do with authentication. The "chip" probably just implements the new and more complicated communication protocol between the controls and the shuffle.

As an engineer, I completely understand why something like they would break backwards compatibility. While it is better to be compatible, you can't always achieve in your designs.

Bottom line... Apple is trying to innovate and not stifle third parties. You can't knock them for having proprietary protocols and connectors if there are not viable standards already available.

iLounge and the EFF appear to be way off base here. They have no right to tell Apple that they cannot make an iPod without controls and they surely cannot mandate Apple supplying a generic dongle connector for controls to be used with non-Apple earphones.

There will be a dongle with controls on the market soon enough. I would personally like to see this stuff just get standardized once a good design emerges. Until that happens, this is the way it is.
post #68 of 239
I still prefer the original. 6 key selling features the old has over the new.

1. Use any headphone
2. Use as usb storage
3. Nice sound quality
4. Click wheel
5. Charge indicator
6. USB charging (can find a usb port anywhere)

So the only reason to get a new Shuffle is that it's smaller yet? I think Apple is going in the wrong direction with the shuffle. Advance the shuffle, and create a new product line called the 'Micro' or something.
Having a USB player is in my mind, important. It's the only reason I bought a few of them (1st gen shuffles). People still use USB storage devices en mass.

I guess it comes down to function over form. Apple has always leaned more on the 'form' side of innovation once a product has taken off. Guess that's why it's 'boutique'.
If your a marathon runner, I guess USB is not a priority.

Therefore, if the Shuffle is now a boutique product with only 1 function, music, then the argument of hardware DRM vs. headphones is somewhat diluted.
Logic would dictate that soon, the shuffle will be the headphones, at which point there will be no 3rd party.
This shuffle is just an awkward intermediary design in it's eventual evolution into a bud.

We cheer Apple for breaking paradigms, and curse them for the same thing.
post #69 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by emulator View Post

and how much % listen to flac on those earphones?

Yes I'm sure most of them are worried about flac on their shuffle.
post #70 of 239
Problem:
1. Multiple buttons on a remote control.
2. Add no extra wire to the cable to reduce cost/weight/flexibility.


Solution:
Add extra wires so newssites all over the world is happy while the consumers suffer.

Better solution:
Add a tiny chip inside the remote that translate keypresses into signals that is read by the processor on the unit itself, all without adding extra wires.
post #71 of 239
Aren't the old ones still being sold?
post #72 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adjei View Post

Actually he has, Mobileme.


Well iLounge is not a whiny blog site. They have been around since iPods came about and if anything they are a huge fansite and promoter of anything iPod.

http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/rev...rd-generation/
post #73 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Only a Koolaid guzzlin Fanboy would buy this piece of garage anyway so the point is moot. They would buy a new pair of headphones every other week if told to do so.

http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/rev...rd-generation/

I think Bill Gates spiked your kool-aid there buddy. You speak much but say little.
post #74 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adjei View Post

Aren't the old ones still being sold?

Yeah- so??
And so is Classic Coke.
post #75 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

I think Bill Gates spiked your kool-aid there buddy. You speak much but say little.

I've said a lot more than you buddy.
And what are you sayin? NOTHING.
post #76 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Yeah- so??
And so is Classic Coke.

So go buy one if you want to use your 300 dollar headphones with your 79 dollar shuffle.
post #77 of 239
This isn't even an article.

It's a pathetic, defensive PR-piece for Apple defending their use of this greedy, monopolative excuse for wanting to suck more money out of whomever they can via licensing fees.

By far, this is the stupidest thing Apple has done lately. I hope they get what's coming to them for this.

And this is coming from me, who owns several Apple products.
post #78 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7Aces View Post

This isn't even an article.

It's a pathetic, defensive PR-piece for Apple defending their use of this greedy, monopolative excuse for wanting to suck more money out of whomever they can via licensing fees.

By far, this is the stupidest thing Apple has done lately. I hope they get what's coming to them for this.

Yes which is more sales, you didn't have to register to write this crap.
post #79 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Developers and others who want a free-for-all environment should stay in Microsoft's world. They provide the alternate where anything goes, for better or worse. I, as a consumer, prefer the more controlled and reliable world of Apple.

Sigh, here come the drones. As a long, long, long time Apple customer, people who eat up Apple's new MicroSoft approach to sticking us every chance they can and calling it a feature are starting to make me want to pull my hair out. Open your eyes and think a little. This is EXACTLY what MicroSoft does. Microsoft forces it's will upon it's customers via software (that's all they make). Apple is now doing the same more and more with hardware.

Your argument is valid when applied towards buying an Apple computer vs. a "built" PC. You can't trot that argument out for every product under the sun.

We're talking earphones here. Completely different than say, a printer with it's own set of complex PPDs that has to communicate through various hardware components within an architecture (all with their own firmware) to work with all the different software that prints to it.

Earphones, stick jack in portyour done.

What exactly is the free-for-all, and reduced reliability involved with plugging a little stick of metal into a hole. How many moving parts in a Jack? How much software is involved in controlling one? There is no "system" here that has anything to do with managing an environment or trying to get complex interfaces between components to function optimally.

One more time, here's how the components work incase your missed it:

Stick jack in port. There is no software involved. Just a metal prong attached to wires, probably made by a few manufactures who sell the same little jack to all the earphone manufactures, including whatever company is making Apple's for them.

Until now, whatever happened on the other side of the plug had nothing to do with how well the earphones functioned, their quality, their form factor.

I guarantee you, if you are looking for reliability within a wide range of comfort, sound quality, and price compared to Apple's crappy earphones, there is a whole world of 3rd party companies that blow Apple a way. There are companies that do nothing but specializing in earphones and they do it way better than Apple does. The same goes for displays for that matter.

This will sound insulting, I wish it weren't, I just think it's true. Your complacency represents everything that is going wrong with Apple. They count more and more on consumers who don't know any better than to swallow the line of crap in which they tell you:

In order to use one Apple product, you must have their piece of fruit on every other electronic device you might want to connect to it, unless they don't make one. Even if the only reason is an authentication chip that serves no other purpose than to render other products useless, and they are doing you a favor by taking away your choices.

For some reason, as they are dolling that crap out, too many customers bend over and say thank you. Nothing makes me more sad than to see the company I've supported for so long BECAUSE they represented a different way of doing things, start to become more and more like MicroSoft.
post #80 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArcoshKobosh View Post

I became a new member today just so I can reply to this article.

Was this article written by Apple? Please give me a break with all the "no really, it's an improvement!" bullshit. This is clearly a way for Apple to sell more accessories and force you to buy additional add-ons. I love the iPod Shuffle and own every model so far, but there is no way I am getting this one. I don't use the shit Apple headphones that come with it and the headphones that I love don't have controls on them. So what am I to do? Oh I can buy an additional adapter for $20 or $30? Fuck that.

Your Apple fanboy bias really shines through with this article. I understand that you probably own a bunch of AAPL shares so you want to hype it up and do as much damage control as you can, but please - this is total bullshit by Apple and you look like a bunch of assholes for trying to defend this DRM bullshit practice.

You could just tell Apple you don't want to buy one when they knock on your door to sell it to you.

I hear and agree with what you are saying. In fact, I am a little fearful that this is going to be the direction they take with all of their iPods.

On the other hand, I think most people that are in the market for an iPod Shuffle are not exactly looking for the top notch equipment, so special headphones are not an issue. For example I'm not going to go to the gym with $300 Bose Quiet Comfort 3 headphones attached to my iPod Shuffle.

Like I said, I agree 100% with you, but obviously this is not a concern for Apple. Cheap has never been their strategy. Swapping parts has never been a strategy either. Think about back to when some of the PowerMacs (pre-iMac) had crazy microphone jacks that only used Apple proprietary equipment.

Obviously the strategy is: Apple iPod headphones, like every set of headphones, will eventually fail. Let's make the easiest and least expensive solution to just buy another set of Apple iPod shuffle headphones.

I don't agree, but I'm sure they will sell plenty of units.
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'