Here is the funniest thing ... the huckster Noel Lee got totally taken advantage of by Jimmy Iovine and signed a really crappy contract. Sad part to me is that Beats original partner, SLS, probably would have built good headphones, rather than the overpriced crap that Monster came up with.
If I were Monster I would not be claiming having anything to do with Beats. The reality is that Beats wouldn't be worth a dime without the marketing efforts and celebrity of Iovine and Dre. This can only be bad press for Monster.
I guess indeed, but that's precisely the kind of things that scare me with Apple.
Scares you? Please.
I'm glad this article has reinforced your prejudices about and distrust for Apple. I don't lose any sleep over Apple acting in its self-interests when it comes to licensing for its platforms. If you want unmanaged and "open," there are other platforms.
I'm glad this article has reinforced your prejudices about and distrust for Apple. I don't lose any sleep over Apple acting in its self-interests when it comes to licensing for its platforms. If you want unmanaged and "open," there are other platforms.
For one, you should exercise restraint about calling others "prejudiced". Especially about Apple.
Second, quite frankly, your view of the world is to me an extreme, privileged, capitalist one. I prefer a more socialist approach, where huge juggernauts with firing power cannot abuse that firing power in the pursuit of their own interest. It doesn't have any relationship to the platform, since it should engulf all of the makers. Whether Apple, Microsoft, Oracle, Adobe, or anyone else does the abusing, that's irrelevant to me.
Here, I voiced a concern that is perfectly legitimate, and your name-calling is unpleasantly received.
For one, you should exercise restraint about calling others "prejudiced". Especially about Apple.
Second, quite frankly, your view of the world is to me an extreme, privileged, capitalist one. I prefer a more socialist approach, where huge juggernauts with firing power cannot abuse that firing power in the pursuit of their own interest. It doesn't have any relationship to the platform, since it should engulf all of the makers. Whether Apple, Microsoft, Oracle, Adobe, or anyone else does the abusing, that's irrelevant to me.
Here, I voiced a concern that is perfectly legitimate, and your name-calling is unpleasantly received.
Everyone has prejudices. Perhaps "bias" would have been a better choice of word.
In any case, Apple doesn't have a monopoly so they can decide who are allowed into the program.
Everyone has prejudices. Perhaps "bias" would have been a better choice of word.
In any case, Apple doesn't have a monopoly so they can decide who are allowed into the program.
Yes, of course they can, but that's precisely a political position here. My view is that as long as quality levels are met, who makes an accessory doesn't matter, and shouldn't matter. If the MFI program is just a program for "companies who are friends with apple", I hope people will just start ignoring the "Made for iPhone" sign and buy whatever is advertised as "Tested for iPhone by independent labs"...
Also, reading about Iovine reinforces my bad feeling about having a person who speaks like that on board at Apple. If what we wish for is a "Think Different" Apple, that is. I guess that if what we want is an Apple that is to the USA what Samsung is to South-Korea (e.g., an behemoth providing employment in vast swathes of industry, with massive political power and gigantic innovation, ahemf), he i a good choice... but again, I'm biased against people who use the kind of words he uses in the way Iovine uses them, and that bas is reinforced by the gizmodo article linked by someone earlier. Not that Gizmodo is a very reliable source of information, but it's not like I have a spy drone at Apple...
Maybe in coming years I'll be proven wrong, that he's a fan of innovation and freedom of artistic expression. For now, he looks like an extremely savvy business lord who successfully rode several trend trains, at the expense of less business-savvy people with artistic or technical talent, but maybe without him,these people wouldn't even exist. What do I know. Each story has several sides
Not that I'm trying to defend Monster, who has been ripping off idiots for years with their absurd claims about cables (not that they're the only ones), but Apple has engaged in business with other companies with whom they've had lawsuits, Samsung being the biggest example.
They could have taken the high road and not banned Monster from their program.
Not that I'm trying to defend Monster, who has been ripping off idiots for years with their absurd claims about cables (not that they're the only ones), but Apple has engaged in business with other companies with whom they've had lawsuits, Samsung being the biggest example.
They could have taken the high road and not banned Monster from their program.
Maybe they have a good reason to ban Monster though. I'm getting curious. It does sound so "low blow", as currently reported... Doesn't sound Apple.
Here is the funniest thing ... the huckster Noel Lee got totally taken advantage of by Jimmy Iovine and signed a really crappy contract. Sad part to me is that Beats original partner, SLS, probably would have built good headphones, rather than the overpriced crap that Monster came up with.
When I read that article here is what I took away, on one hand you got Kevin Lee claiming Beats headphone are nothing but a fashison statement. Then you have Dre and Jimmy claiming that Monster is just a manufacturer and distributor and the real Sound/Audio design came from Beats not Monster, Kevin counter his previous statement by saying all the design and engineering came from them. He can not seem to make up his mind which is it, a fashion statement or engineered sound device.
Then he offers up drawing to proof they did the design anyone can create the slideware he is showing that does not mean they did all the design work.
Honestly this is just a hit piece that Kevin Lee put together to try and discredit his previous work so we can now sell people more of his new crap.
As an Electrical Engineer, there is nothing special about copper wires when it comes to the flow of electrons, Grand it at high frequencies electical properties of copper wires can change, but audio frequencies are not high frequencies so whether you buy a Monster cable or some other copper cable the electrons flow the exact same way. There is no measable difference.
A number of years back I ran accross an audio engineer's website who was retired and worked for some of the big name Audio equipement companies. He has a guild on selecting the proper wires for speaker, most of it was about the power you plan to drive the speaker with and make sure your wires were poperly size for power and length of run. He also stated that some cables in the industry are way over price and it was all marketing hype and there is no engineering data that shows one cable properly maded and size are any different that another. He did not name Monster, but it was inferred by his other comments. He said when he worked in the industry full time he was told by management never to say anyting negative about Monster, otherwise, they would file a suite against the company. Not only did this guy go after other small companies but went after the big guys if they said anything negative about their products. They bully anyone and everyone.
Monster's business model (and motto): "Let's hope we can sell this expensive cable before the chump figures out it's unnecessary."
I agree Monster's cables are stupidly overpriced, but at least the few cables I have been dumb enough to buy from them still work.
Apple's business model is just as bad IMHO... "Let's sell this expensive and proprietary cable that frays at the ends after a few months, forcing our customers to keep buying expensive replacements over and over and over."
Comments
Scares you? Please.
I'm glad this article has reinforced your prejudices about and distrust for Apple. I don't lose any sleep over Apple acting in its self-interests when it comes to licensing for its platforms. If you want unmanaged and "open," there are other platforms.
Scares you? Please.
I'm glad this article has reinforced your prejudices about and distrust for Apple. I don't lose any sleep over Apple acting in its self-interests when it comes to licensing for its platforms. If you want unmanaged and "open," there are other platforms.
For one, you should exercise restraint about calling others "prejudiced". Especially about Apple.
Second, quite frankly, your view of the world is to me an extreme, privileged, capitalist one. I prefer a more socialist approach, where huge juggernauts with firing power cannot abuse that firing power in the pursuit of their own interest. It doesn't have any relationship to the platform, since it should engulf all of the makers. Whether Apple, Microsoft, Oracle, Adobe, or anyone else does the abusing, that's irrelevant to me.
Here, I voiced a concern that is perfectly legitimate, and your name-calling is unpleasantly received.
Everyone has prejudices. Perhaps "bias" would have been a better choice of word.
In any case, Apple doesn't have a monopoly so they can decide who are allowed into the program.
Everyone has prejudices. Perhaps "bias" would have been a better choice of word.
In any case, Apple doesn't have a monopoly so they can decide who are allowed into the program.
Yes, of course they can, but that's precisely a political position here. My view is that as long as quality levels are met, who makes an accessory doesn't matter, and shouldn't matter. If the MFI program is just a program for "companies who are friends with apple", I hope people will just start ignoring the "Made for iPhone" sign and buy whatever is advertised as "Tested for iPhone by independent labs"...
Also, reading about Iovine reinforces my bad feeling about having a person who speaks like that on board at Apple. If what we wish for is a "Think Different" Apple, that is. I guess that if what we want is an Apple that is to the USA what Samsung is to South-Korea (e.g., an behemoth providing employment in vast swathes of industry, with massive political power and gigantic innovation, ahemf), he i a good choice... but again, I'm biased against people who use the kind of words he uses in the way Iovine uses them, and that bas is reinforced by the gizmodo article linked by someone earlier. Not that Gizmodo is a very reliable source of information, but it's not like I have a spy drone at Apple...
Maybe in coming years I'll be proven wrong, that he's a fan of innovation and freedom of artistic expression. For now, he looks like an extremely savvy business lord who successfully rode several trend trains, at the expense of less business-savvy people with artistic or technical talent, but maybe without him,these people wouldn't even exist. What do I know. Each story has several sides
Not that I'm trying to defend Monster, who has been ripping off idiots for years with their absurd claims about cables (not that they're the only ones), but Apple has engaged in business with other companies with whom they've had lawsuits, Samsung being the biggest example.
They could have taken the high road and not banned Monster from their program.
Sounds like Monster must have a good case against Apple.
Not that I'm trying to defend Monster, who has been ripping off idiots for years with their absurd claims about cables (not that they're the only ones), but Apple has engaged in business with other companies with whom they've had lawsuits, Samsung being the biggest example.
They could have taken the high road and not banned Monster from their program.
Maybe they have a good reason to ban Monster though. I'm getting curious. It does sound so "low blow", as currently reported... Doesn't sound Apple.
When I read that article here is what I took away, on one hand you got Kevin Lee claiming Beats headphone are nothing but a fashison statement. Then you have Dre and Jimmy claiming that Monster is just a manufacturer and distributor and the real Sound/Audio design came from Beats not Monster, Kevin counter his previous statement by saying all the design and engineering came from them. He can not seem to make up his mind which is it, a fashion statement or engineered sound device.
Then he offers up drawing to proof they did the design anyone can create the slideware he is showing that does not mean they did all the design work.
Honestly this is just a hit piece that Kevin Lee put together to try and discredit his previous work so we can now sell people more of his new crap.
As an Electrical Engineer, there is nothing special about copper wires when it comes to the flow of electrons, Grand it at high frequencies electical properties of copper wires can change, but audio frequencies are not high frequencies so whether you buy a Monster cable or some other copper cable the electrons flow the exact same way. There is no measable difference.
A number of years back I ran accross an audio engineer's website who was retired and worked for some of the big name Audio equipement companies. He has a guild on selecting the proper wires for speaker, most of it was about the power you plan to drive the speaker with and make sure your wires were poperly size for power and length of run. He also stated that some cables in the industry are way over price and it was all marketing hype and there is no engineering data that shows one cable properly maded and size are any different that another. He did not name Monster, but it was inferred by his other comments. He said when he worked in the industry full time he was told by management never to say anyting negative about Monster, otherwise, they would file a suite against the company. Not only did this guy go after other small companies but went after the big guys if they said anything negative about their products. They bully anyone and everyone.
Monster's business model (and motto): "Let's hope we can sell this expensive cable before the chump figures out it's unnecessary."
I agree Monster's cables are stupidly overpriced, but at least the few cables I have been dumb enough to buy from them still work.
Apple's business model is just as bad IMHO... "Let's sell this expensive and proprietary cable that frays at the ends after a few months, forcing our customers to keep buying expensive replacements over and over and over."
Better Call Saul
Ha Ha!
I really don't think Monster is seeking "putative damages" though. Punitive?