I hardly think having to wait to get home to rip the CD is a hardship. If so, buy a laptop and carry it with you at all times.
And then whenever he wants to sync his ipod, he has to do it with his laptop instead of his home PC.
The point is, why should someone have their device tethered to a single computer if they want to get music on it? I can understand this for something like the one button sync (for obvious reasons), but why not have a way to send over files to a device if you don't have that home computer handy?
You're thinking like a tech person. My brother isn't a tech person. He doesn't want to buy a laptop so he can get his music transferred to a device whenever he wants. That's a stupid reason to buy a laptop. He wants to know why he can't put music on his ipod in a similar way to how he gets it on his basic phone. He loves itunes sync, but he doesn't get why it's the ONLY way it can work. (He's wiped his ipod before trying to sync it to another computer)
You can call him an idiot if you like. But that's the typical tech user.
And then whenever he wants to sync his ipod, he has to do it with his laptop instead of his home PC.
The point is, why should someone have their device tethered to a single computer if they want to get music on it? I can understand this for something like the one button sync (for obvious reasons), but why not have a way to send over files to a device if you don't have that home computer handy?
You're thinking like a tech person. My brother isn't a tech person. He doesn't want to buy a laptop so he can get his music transferred to a device whenever he wants. That's a stupid reason to buy a laptop. He wants to know why he can't put music on his ipod in a similar way to how he gets it on his basic phone. He loves itunes sync, but he doesn't get why it's the ONLY way it can work. (He's wiped his ipod before trying to sync it to another computer)
You can call him an idiot if you like. But that's the typical tech user.
As someone said before, all he had to do was to use manual sync on all of his computers. Then he's free to sync whatever music across however many computer he likes.
As someone said before, all he had to do was to use manual sync on all of his computers. Then he's free to sync whatever music across however many computer he likes.
Provided those computers have itunes and he remembers to set it up for manual sync (which means auto sync won't work on his home computer)
Why does he have to disable one of the cooler aspects of his ipod all the time, so he can get music onto the device?
And then whenever he wants to sync his ipod, he has to do it with his laptop instead of his home PC.
The point is, why should someone have their device tethered to a single computer if they want to get music on it? I can understand this for something like the one button sync (for obvious reasons), but why not have a way to send over files to a device if you don't have that home computer handy?
You're thinking like a tech person. My brother isn't a tech person. He doesn't want to buy a laptop so he can get his music transferred to a device whenever he wants. That's a stupid reason to buy a laptop. He wants to know why he can't put music on his ipod in a similar way to how he gets it on his basic phone. He loves itunes sync, but he doesn't get why it's the ONLY way it can work. (He's wiped his ipod before trying to sync it to another computer)
You can call him an idiot if you like. But that's the typical tech user.
Call me stupid, but surely his "basic phone" doesn't rip CD's either. It just seems like a weak excuse to b$tch about iTunes. Don't misunderstand me, I would love to be able to download mp3's from Amazon or Napster directly to my iPad. But there are other mp3 players that will allow what your brother wants. Maybe an iPod isn't the right device for him.
Call me stupid, but surely his "basic phone" doesn't rip CD's either. It just seems like a weak excuse to b$tch about iTunes. Don't misunderstand me, I would love to be able to download mp3's from Amazon or Napster directly to my iPad. But there are other mp3 players that will allow what your brother wants. Maybe an iPod isn't the right device for him.
His basic phone can sync with any computer and receive MP3's without having special hardware installed. Does syncing it that way suck? Yes, but in a pinch you can do it. He got the ipod as a graduation present, and uses a mac for school. He LIKES the one touch sync, but he doesn't drag his computer around with him whenever he might buy music either.
Why does he have to choose to accept the entire package (itunes, ipod) if he only likes one or the other? Again, I'm not complaining that Apple made the syncing seamless across their devices. That's a smart marketing move. But that doesn't mean they should lock out a simple data transfer. And YES, I know you can set it to manually sync, but then he loses automatic sync at his house.
Because that?s the way it works sometimes. If I want to play a mario game, I have no choice but to use a Nintendo console which is in many ways inferior to many other systems out there like the X-Box and the PS3. Same concept the other way around, if I have an X-box, I can?t plan Playstation games on it either. Apple is doing the exact same thing, linking hardware products to software.
The only thing that matters in the market is the presence of competition, Back in 2005 and before, there was, and still many different players competing in the same game - many of them doing it the same way that Apple did.
You simply cannot always have your cake and eat it too.
So basically you like iTunes Application but want iTunes to support all the music devices out there. This is simply not possible and Apple can't be required to do so. iTunes is developed as a companion to iDevices. It is not Apple's fault that they made it better than all those software that accompany the mp3 players. You mentioned about Zune software yourself.
Yeah, It's kind of like suing HP becuse their printer drivers and scanner utilities don't work with Epson or Lexmark or the paper choices only include generic photo papers or HP premium photo papers but won't accomodate Epson brand paper.
Comments
I hardly think having to wait to get home to rip the CD is a hardship. If so, buy a laptop and carry it with you at all times.
And then whenever he wants to sync his ipod, he has to do it with his laptop instead of his home PC.
The point is, why should someone have their device tethered to a single computer if they want to get music on it? I can understand this for something like the one button sync (for obvious reasons), but why not have a way to send over files to a device if you don't have that home computer handy?
You're thinking like a tech person. My brother isn't a tech person. He doesn't want to buy a laptop so he can get his music transferred to a device whenever he wants. That's a stupid reason to buy a laptop. He wants to know why he can't put music on his ipod in a similar way to how he gets it on his basic phone. He loves itunes sync, but he doesn't get why it's the ONLY way it can work. (He's wiped his ipod before trying to sync it to another computer)
You can call him an idiot if you like. But that's the typical tech user.
And then whenever he wants to sync his ipod, he has to do it with his laptop instead of his home PC.
The point is, why should someone have their device tethered to a single computer if they want to get music on it? I can understand this for something like the one button sync (for obvious reasons), but why not have a way to send over files to a device if you don't have that home computer handy?
You're thinking like a tech person. My brother isn't a tech person. He doesn't want to buy a laptop so he can get his music transferred to a device whenever he wants. That's a stupid reason to buy a laptop. He wants to know why he can't put music on his ipod in a similar way to how he gets it on his basic phone. He loves itunes sync, but he doesn't get why it's the ONLY way it can work. (He's wiped his ipod before trying to sync it to another computer)
You can call him an idiot if you like. But that's the typical tech user.
As someone said before, all he had to do was to use manual sync on all of his computers. Then he's free to sync whatever music across however many computer he likes.
As someone said before, all he had to do was to use manual sync on all of his computers. Then he's free to sync whatever music across however many computer he likes.
Provided those computers have itunes and he remembers to set it up for manual sync (which means auto sync won't work on his home computer)
Why does he have to disable one of the cooler aspects of his ipod all the time, so he can get music onto the device?
And then whenever he wants to sync his ipod, he has to do it with his laptop instead of his home PC.
The point is, why should someone have their device tethered to a single computer if they want to get music on it? I can understand this for something like the one button sync (for obvious reasons), but why not have a way to send over files to a device if you don't have that home computer handy?
You're thinking like a tech person. My brother isn't a tech person. He doesn't want to buy a laptop so he can get his music transferred to a device whenever he wants. That's a stupid reason to buy a laptop. He wants to know why he can't put music on his ipod in a similar way to how he gets it on his basic phone. He loves itunes sync, but he doesn't get why it's the ONLY way it can work. (He's wiped his ipod before trying to sync it to another computer)
You can call him an idiot if you like. But that's the typical tech user.
Call me stupid, but surely his "basic phone" doesn't rip CD's either. It just seems like a weak excuse to b$tch about iTunes. Don't misunderstand me, I would love to be able to download mp3's from Amazon or Napster directly to my iPad. But there are other mp3 players that will allow what your brother wants. Maybe an iPod isn't the right device for him.
Call me stupid, but surely his "basic phone" doesn't rip CD's either. It just seems like a weak excuse to b$tch about iTunes. Don't misunderstand me, I would love to be able to download mp3's from Amazon or Napster directly to my iPad. But there are other mp3 players that will allow what your brother wants. Maybe an iPod isn't the right device for him.
His basic phone can sync with any computer and receive MP3's without having special hardware installed. Does syncing it that way suck? Yes, but in a pinch you can do it. He got the ipod as a graduation present, and uses a mac for school. He LIKES the one touch sync, but he doesn't drag his computer around with him whenever he might buy music either.
Why does he have to choose to accept the entire package (itunes, ipod) if he only likes one or the other? Again, I'm not complaining that Apple made the syncing seamless across their devices. That's a smart marketing move. But that doesn't mean they should lock out a simple data transfer. And YES, I know you can set it to manually sync, but then he loses automatic sync at his house.
Why does he have to choose all or nothing?
Why does he have to choose all or nothing?
Because that?s the way it works sometimes. If I want to play a mario game, I have no choice but to use a Nintendo console which is in many ways inferior to many other systems out there like the X-Box and the PS3. Same concept the other way around, if I have an X-box, I can?t plan Playstation games on it either. Apple is doing the exact same thing, linking hardware products to software.
The only thing that matters in the market is the presence of competition, Back in 2005 and before, there was, and still many different players competing in the same game - many of them doing it the same way that Apple did.
You simply cannot always have your cake and eat it too.
So basically you like iTunes Application but want iTunes to support all the music devices out there. This is simply not possible and Apple can't be required to do so. iTunes is developed as a companion to iDevices. It is not Apple's fault that they made it better than all those software that accompany the mp3 players. You mentioned about Zune software yourself.
Yeah, It's kind of like suing HP becuse their printer drivers and scanner utilities don't work with Epson or Lexmark or the paper choices only include generic photo papers or HP premium photo papers but won't accomodate Epson brand paper.