Apple criticized for iPod shuffle's new 'authentication chip' - Page 3

Originally Posted by 7Aces

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.

Originally Posted by Adjei

Yes which is more sales, you didn't have to register to write this crap.

Originally Posted by GMHut

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.

Originally Posted by Adjei

So go buy one if you want to use your 300 dollar headphones with your 79 dollar shuffle.

Originally Posted by Adjei

Aren't the old ones still being sold?

Originally Posted by Beklim

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.

Originally Posted by teckstud

I use $15 Sony sposts headphone which sound twice as good as Apple headphone. I've owned 5 iPods and have 4 unopened Apple headphones laying in a drawer. Who buys iPods for Apples headphones anyway?

So go ahead and buy your new $79 Apple Koolaid suppository.

Originally Posted by 7Aces

Well, I thought it was worth a shot to try to drag you out of your thick haze of blind fanboyism. My mistake.

Sure, Apple can screw their costumers over as much as they like - as long as it sells, right?

Originally Posted by hittrj01

Indeed they are! Finally, someone with an ounce of knowledge. For everyone who hates the new shuffle (even though no one on this forum has touched one, let alone seen one in person), you can still get the 1GB second-gen shuffle for $49.

http://store.apple.com/us/browse/hom...mco=MTYzNDU2Mg

Originally Posted by iReality85

I think most of the uproad is coming from the fact that yet again, Apple has gone out of its way to make things overly difficult for the consumer. This situation is very much akin to the new unibody macbooks sporting mini-DVI ports. Here they are, providing a new product, and are telling you what kind of accessory you can use, without that type of accessory being widely available nor mainstream throughout the market. With these earphones, Apple is diving into murky waters indeed, since they are essentially saying that the 4G Shuffle and these earphones are one product, naturally, because you can't adequetly control the Shuffle without them. This is quite strange, as IMO probably 99% of consumers consider earphones/headphones as accessories to their music players, and don't want to be told what type, style, or kind of earphone/heaphone they have to purchase and use.

Originally Posted by Adjei

Yeah they are screwing their customers but yet more and more people line up to give their money to Apple, I guess those doing that must be complete "idiots" and you know better than them, since Apple isn't screwing you over.

Originally Posted by Adjei

I've also owned 15 dollar Sony earphones, in fact these ones and they don't sound any better than the stock Apple white ones:

Originally Posted by hittrj01

So in other words, you believe Apple should just follow instead of lead and use antiquated industry standards, no matter how useless or out-of-date they are. Apple has always and consistently been in the business of innovation, and has more often than not been proven right.

Originally Posted by Luca

3.5mm audio jacks are antiquated industry standards?

BTW I bet you're really mad Apple stopped using their proprietary BS and started using industry standards (even though you claim to hate anything that is standardized). I suppose in your ideal world, we'd all be using ADB keyboards and mice instead of USB, AAUI network ports instead of ethernet, ADC and DB-15 for digital and analog video (instead of DisplayPort, DVI/HDMI, and VGA), and those weird Mac serial port connectors for miscellaneous devices instead of USB. Oh, and external SCSI instead of USB and Firewire.

Where Apple does a good job is picking up on newly introduced industry standards and adopting and promoting them so they become popular. They did it with USB (they weren't the first to include USB, but they were the first to make it popular). They're doing that with DisplayPort. Far from being a proprietary Apple-only connector, DisplayPort is a new standard that will eventually provide a much more versatile means of connecting monitors to computers.

Originally Posted by Adjei

Who told you Apple is different from Microsoft, they are both companies that want your money, get that through your head.

Originally Posted by hittrj01

So in other words, you believe Apple should just follow instead of lead and use antiquated industry standards, no matter how useless or out-of-date they are. Apple has always and consistently been in the business of innovation, and has more often than not been proven right.

With their computers, for example, Apple was the first to move away from floppy drives, the first to remove a physical latch on their laptops that could and would always break, the first to integrate web cams on their computers, and now one of the first to adopt display port. These are only just a few of the examples too. This doesn't even start to get into all the innovations that the iPod and iPhone brought to their respective markets. Look back to 2000, before the iPod came out, and tell me things aren't completely different (in a good way) single-handedly because of the iPod. Easy-to-use interfaces, dead simple media syncing, readily available media in an integrated store... the list could go on and on.

I am not going to say the new shuffle is hands-down the best yet, as I have not played with one myself yet, but I am willing to give Apple the benefit of the doubt before I will judge any of their innovations, because their track record speaks for itself.

Originally Posted by iReality85

There is a distinct difference between "leading the industry" and making unnecessary changes to a product that was perfectly functional in the first place. I agree with Luca in that Apple has over-engineered the Shuffle with the 4G. Please tell me why a music player's sole mode of operability should come from a pair of earphones? The key words are sole mode of operability. That's kind of ridiculous, no? In actuality, I *can* see these earphones being very useful for the larger iPod/iPhone, products that you would typically keep in a pocket, case, etc and therefore have blocked access to the controls, but the Shuffle? Why strip the shuffle of controls when most typically clip Shuffles on their clothes, i.e. have easy external access to it? Defacing the Shuffle and routing its control features through earphones makes absolutely no sense anyway you look at it.

Originally Posted by Beklim

Explain how to implement a remote control to a device without adding extra wires for each button.

How do we do this?

What do you think happens when you press a button on an IR-based remote for your TV?

Originally Posted by hittrj01

I believe the sole reason Apple is doing this on the shuffle is to test this new innovation in the lowest-risk market possible. Put this on the low-end shuffle, see how it goes, if it tanks, just drop it, but if it takes off, start integrating it into everything else. There really is not much of a risk doing this. If they put this on the iPhone first and it bombed, things could get complicated. If it bombs on the shuffle, there won't be too much of a loss. I for one am intrigued to play around with one of these, but unlike other people on this forum, will reserve judgment until I have my first-hand experience.

Originally Posted by Fast Fred 1

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

What a prince!

Originally Posted by JeffDM

I'm puzzled why you'd say that about SpamSandwich's comment.

As it is, standard practice is supposed to be that those that make the original claims should be the ones that back them up. For example, rather than taking the presense of a chip and assuming it's encrypted to get license fees, those that started the story should have taken the simple steps to show that it actually is encrypted rather than whipping up the hysterics by saying it is without having done adequate verification. The presence of a chip means little, it could be a plain serial code or encrypted, without reading the signal, they don't know the difference.

Originally Posted by Luca

Still, the new Shuffle is the one Apple product where it makes the least sense to incorporate this new control scheme because they removed all the buttons! They could have started including the cable on the other iPods... the Nano, the Classic, the Touch, and even thd old Shuffle, just to give third parties a head start on making adapters and headphones that use the controls. At least all their other iPods have controls on the face of the player so you're not required to use the Apple headphones.

Originally Posted by teckstud

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

Originally Posted by ktappe

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.

Originally Posted by iReality85

This is quite strange, as IMO probably 99% of consumers consider earphones/headphones as accessories to their music players, and don't want to be told what type, style, or kind of earphone/heaphone they have to purchase and use.

Still, the new Shuffle is the one Apple product where it makes the least sense to incorporate this new control scheme because they removed all the buttons!

Originally Posted by hittrj01

I believe the sole reason Apple is doing this on the shuffle is to test this new innovation in the lowest-risk market possible. Put this on the low-end shuffle, see how it goes, if it tanks, just drop it, but if it takes off, start integrating it into everything else. There really is not much of a risk doing this. If they put this on the iPhone first and it bombed, things could get complicated. If it bombs on the shuffle, there won't be too much of a loss. I for one am intrigued to play around with one of these, but unlike other people on this forum, will reserve judgment until I have my first-hand experience.

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
3. Nice sound quality
4. Click wheel
5. Charge indicator
6. USB charging (can find a usb port anywhere)

Originally Posted by iReality85

There is a distinct difference between "leading the industry" and making unnecessary changes to a product that was perfectly functional in the first place. I agree with Luca in that Apple has over-engineered the Shuffle with the 4G. Please tell me why a music player's sole mode of operability should come from a pair of earphones? The key words are sole mode of operability. That's kind of ridiculous, no? In actuality, I *can* see these earphones being very useful for the larger iPod/iPhone, products that you would typically keep in a pocket, case, etc and therefore have blocked access to the controls, but the Shuffle? Why strip the shuffle of controls when most typically clip Shuffles on their clothes, i.e. have easy external access to it? Defacing the Shuffle and routing its control features through earphones makes absolutely no sense anyway you look at it.

Originally Posted by 7Aces

Apple makes good products - I don't deny that, writing this from my iMac, my iPod touch next to me, in the same living room as my Apple TV. So yes, I have no problem handing my money to Apple when the deal doesn't involve me being screwed over. But unlike you, I don't let my enthusiasm for some of Apple's products cloud my sense of free will.

But when they pull this kind of stuff, monopolizing a universal accessory like headphones and then charging others for making compatible ones, or charging to enable 802.11n WiFi on iMacs, they are stepping way over the line.

Originally Posted by Abster2core

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