I agree. I mean, the feature is intended to help users find music they may like based on what they currently listen to, so it's not bad intentioned.
Bullshit. It is intended to make more money for an already insanely profitable business, at the expense of iTunes usability. With that ministore pane open, I can only see a handful of tracks crammed in between the browser on top. Very poor GUI design, but a brilliant marketing design.
What this shows is that Apple is beginning to become drunk with their newfound success, and they are turning the reigns over from the software engineers to the marketing airheads.
Now, they fixed it right away, so we know that at heart Apple still gets it. My question now is, did Steve Jobs fire anyone over this? Or did he sign off on it? Because this sort of crass commercialism is something that only a few years ago Jobs would have pointed out as an important difference between Mac OS X and Windows XP.
Hopefully this was a mistake, and not a sign of things to come.
This whole discussion is irrelevant. The whole worry about someone (they) at Apple bothering to look through a log of one hundred million or so playlist entries just to report someone who's listening to Mein Kampf or Das Kapital to the CIA is rediculous.
Quite right. But the idea of the CIA, Pentagon, or more likely, the NSA telling Apple that they are going to search their lists for users with music listening patterns that match known terrorists is not quite so ridiculous. And we already know that they don't need a court order to do so.
Or perhaps in '06 control of the Senate is in question, and the White House decides to use the NSA to search Apple's logs for all the democratic candidates, just to see if something embarrassing comes up. Of course Bush wouldn't do that, but what if he did?
Do you realize why video store rental records are kept under such tight security, and why they can't even tell you over the phone what's overdue? Because a long time ago, someone found out that a congressman was renting porns, and it went public. So congress passed a law within days to secure those rental records, because of course MOST congressmen spend lots of time away from home, and so they've got to either cheat on their wives or masturbate. Either way their fucked if the public finds out (because of course most men do not masturbate).
Information about people is extremely useful for powerful people with bad intentions. We should protect it, and collect as little of it as we can. This idea of trusting authority figures to do the right thing is ridiculous.
It's just an assumption on your part that it is spyware.
If it secretly sends information without my consent or even knowledge for the purpose of advertisement, then it is spyware. MiniStore certainly qualified for that until very recently.
Quote:
I think it's much simpler than that. As Auxio said, it's simply to make the experience better, and thereby to hope that people will buy more songs. [/B]
You just keep believing that and soon you'll see other MiniStores popping up in every updated piece of software. Not just Apple's either.
did Steve Jobs fire anyone over this? Or did he sign off on it? Because this sort of crass commercialism is something that only a few years ago Jobs would have pointed out as an important difference between Mac OS X and Windows XP.
Something like that would not happen without his approval. So if somebody needs to be fired, it's him. Not that he needs to be fired for a mistake like that, but it most certainly did not happen without his knowledge.
I'm wondering, is this really different from showing the currently playing iTunes track in iChat, or writing some God-awful blog with "my mood" and "listening to..." headers at the top of it?
My point is, there are large numbers of people out there who are more than keen to share with the rest of the world what kind of music they are listening to. Surely the evil corporations can find out what people are listening to by visiting one of the 3 million-odd WinAmp generated playlists people insist on uploading to the internet.
Of course the difference in this case is that Apple didn't give users an explicit message that they were monitoring the currently playing song. Users still had a choice to switch it off, but it wasn't made obvious in the way that it is now.
Why this "I am happy to give Apple information of what I listen to without my knowledge because they would never do anything wrong" is fanboyism? Because a vast majority of the members here and the mac community in general has the exact opposite take on spy-ware when we didn´t get it from Apple. That people won´t accept it as spyware only proves that point.
melgross: Back up your claim about the content of the packages. The tactics you are using has no ground outside third grade school yards.
Why this "I am happy to give Apple information of what I listen to without my knowledge because they would never do anything wrong" is fanboyism? Because a vast majority of the members here and the mac community in general has the exact opposite take on spy-ware when we didn´t get it from Apple. That people won´t accept it as spyware only proves that point.
melgross: Back up your claim about the content of the packages. The tactics you are using has no ground outside third grade school yards.
Tactics? For a moderator, you are acting very childish.
You're the one calling people who don't happen to think that this is the issue, that just a couple of people here, including you, seem to think it is.
Even on the non-Mac sites, this isn't considered to be such a scandal.
It's absurd to say that because those of us who think it is a minor issue are thinking that Apple could do no wrong. I've put them on the carpet many times.
You don't have to pretend you are "pure" because you think this is an issue equal to what Sony did with their rootkit.
So many words and still no link. You made a claim now back it up.
I don't have much time now, having just come from a 2 1/2 hour visit to the dentist, and having to leave d=shortly, but As this is new, so that I didn't have to search, I'll supply iy.
Other than the song being clicked on, the only othrt thing being sent is the Apple ID. Since Apple already has this, as well as the complete list of all the songs you boughtt ,he only other thing they are seeing is what you are playing, or clicking on now.
While, technically, you might want to call this spyware, if you are paranoid, it hardly qualifies, in the normal sense.
The main problem is that they didn't specifically say what they were doing, even though it was pretty obvious, and far less than the Goggle bar, if you have one.
I know people have used Ethereal to dump the packets, but I can't find anyone who's taken the time to dissect exactly what the packets contain. So any claims about what's being sent would appear to be false until proven otherwise.
Other than the song being clicked on, the only othrt thing being sent is the Apple ID. Since Apple already has this, as well as the complete list of all the songs you boughtt ,he only other thing they are seeing is what you are playing, or clicking on now.
Thanks.
So they ARE sending the song I listen to and nothing in the data that is sent to Apple indicates it is deleted.
And what you write is actually worse than what I thought. I only thought the song was sent and the result was sent back. With my Apple-ID they not only have an ID, but can link that ID to me specific (since an Apple ID requires registering).
So what do they have the possibility to link to me?
My IP
My physical address
My email address
The songs I bought
The songs and other material I have listened to through my computer
Nothing in this makes me any calmer, on the contrary.
Why this "I am happy to give Apple information of what I listen to without my knowledge because they would never do anything wrong" is fanboyism? Because a vast majority of the members here and the mac community in general has the exact opposite take on spy-ware when we didn´t get it from Apple. That people won´t accept it as spyware only proves that point.
The reason is because Apple has built a legitimate business based on other ways of generating revenue. So they would be less compelled than a smaller company such as Real Networks (for example) to sell information as it could possibly hurt their legitimate revenue stream. The small amount of monetary gain would be far outweighed by the negative publicity since they've marketed their OS against MS Windows as being less prone to spyware/adware. That's why there's a bit more trust, because there's a business case against them doing it (as opposed to a lot of other companies for whom the majority of their revenue comes from selling information).
Sorry. I don´t trust companies with over 100 workers. Even if the intentions are right there could always be someone in the company with another agenda.
So so far we have: Apple is releasing an app that without warning you sends information about the files you are listening to along with your Apple-ID to a third party marketing company I have never heard of and I should somehow feel safe because uncle Steve would never let anything bad happen to me?
The reason is because Apple has built a legitimate business based on other ways of generating revenue. So they would be less compelled than a smaller company such as Real Networks (for example) to sell information as it could possibly hurt their legitimate revenue stream.
The exact same thing could be said about Sony, which is a much larger company than Apple with a lot more revenue streams, yet they still went ahead and did it. Their other legitimate business practices do not somehow automagically stop them from doing something that could be illegitimate, or even spyware, as was the case with the rootkit, or in this case, MiniStore.
They're not equal in terms of seriousness and breach of privacy, but they're not that far either.
So they ARE sending the song I listen to and nothing in the data that is sent to Apple indicates it is deleted.
And what you write is actually worse than what I thought. I only thought the song was sent and the result was sent back. With my Apple-ID they not only have an ID, but can link that ID to me specific (since an Apple ID requires registering).
So what do they have the possibility to link to me?
My IP
My physical address
My email address
The songs I bought
The songs and other material I have listened to through my computer
Nothing in this makes me any calmer, on the contrary.
So then, if you give Apple information it already has, plus just songs you are clicking on, you are worried that this is serious?
Comments
Originally posted by Anders
Corporations are bad (just think about M$). But Apple is Different.
Pure fanboyism.
Maybe you should venture out of your dreamworld occasionally.
We haven't had any fanbois in this thread yet.
Originally posted by melgross
[B]If you read arounf the tech sites, a fair number of people have looked at this.
But you won't believe them anyway, I suppose.
If it's the same people that discovered this spyware, I will.
I don't believe that everything they do is bad either.
Not everything. But this certainly qualifies, hence their correction of their behaviour.
Originally posted by Gene Clean
If it's the same people that discovered this spyware, I will.
Not everything. But this certainly qualifies, hence their correction of their behaviour.
It's just an assumption on your part that it is spyware.
I think it's much simpler than that. As Auxio said, it's simply to make the experience better, and thereby to hope that people will buy more songs.
Not everything has a dark side.
Originally posted by auxio
I agree. I mean, the feature is intended to help users find music they may like based on what they currently listen to, so it's not bad intentioned.
Bullshit. It is intended to make more money for an already insanely profitable business, at the expense of iTunes usability. With that ministore pane open, I can only see a handful of tracks crammed in between the browser on top. Very poor GUI design, but a brilliant marketing design.
What this shows is that Apple is beginning to become drunk with their newfound success, and they are turning the reigns over from the software engineers to the marketing airheads.
Now, they fixed it right away, so we know that at heart Apple still gets it. My question now is, did Steve Jobs fire anyone over this? Or did he sign off on it? Because this sort of crass commercialism is something that only a few years ago Jobs would have pointed out as an important difference between Mac OS X and Windows XP.
Hopefully this was a mistake, and not a sign of things to come.
Originally posted by auxio
This whole discussion is irrelevant. The whole worry about someone (they) at Apple bothering to look through a log of one hundred million or so playlist entries just to report someone who's listening to Mein Kampf or Das Kapital to the CIA is rediculous.
Quite right. But the idea of the CIA, Pentagon, or more likely, the NSA telling Apple that they are going to search their lists for users with music listening patterns that match known terrorists is not quite so ridiculous. And we already know that they don't need a court order to do so.
Or perhaps in '06 control of the Senate is in question, and the White House decides to use the NSA to search Apple's logs for all the democratic candidates, just to see if something embarrassing comes up. Of course Bush wouldn't do that, but what if he did?
Do you realize why video store rental records are kept under such tight security, and why they can't even tell you over the phone what's overdue? Because a long time ago, someone found out that a congressman was renting porns, and it went public. So congress passed a law within days to secure those rental records, because of course MOST congressmen spend lots of time away from home, and so they've got to either cheat on their wives or masturbate. Either way their fucked if the public finds out (because of course most men do not masturbate).
Information about people is extremely useful for powerful people with bad intentions. We should protect it, and collect as little of it as we can. This idea of trusting authority figures to do the right thing is ridiculous.
Originally posted by melgross
It's just an assumption on your part that it is spyware.
If it secretly sends information without my consent or even knowledge for the purpose of advertisement, then it is spyware. MiniStore certainly qualified for that until very recently.
I think it's much simpler than that. As Auxio said, it's simply to make the experience better, and thereby to hope that people will buy more songs. [/B]
You just keep believing that and soon you'll see other MiniStores popping up in every updated piece of software. Not just Apple's either.
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
did Steve Jobs fire anyone over this? Or did he sign off on it? Because this sort of crass commercialism is something that only a few years ago Jobs would have pointed out as an important difference between Mac OS X and Windows XP.
Something like that would not happen without his approval. So if somebody needs to be fired, it's him. Not that he needs to be fired for a mistake like that, but it most certainly did not happen without his knowledge.
My point is, there are large numbers of people out there who are more than keen to share with the rest of the world what kind of music they are listening to. Surely the evil corporations can find out what people are listening to by visiting one of the 3 million-odd WinAmp generated playlists people insist on uploading to the internet.
Of course the difference in this case is that Apple didn't give users an explicit message that they were monitoring the currently playing song. Users still had a choice to switch it off, but it wasn't made obvious in the way that it is now.
melgross: Back up your claim about the content of the packages. The tactics you are using has no ground outside third grade school yards.
Originally posted by Anders
Why this "I am happy to give Apple information of what I listen to without my knowledge because they would never do anything wrong" is fanboyism? Because a vast majority of the members here and the mac community in general has the exact opposite take on spy-ware when we didn´t get it from Apple. That people won´t accept it as spyware only proves that point.
melgross: Back up your claim about the content of the packages. The tactics you are using has no ground outside third grade school yards.
Tactics? For a moderator, you are acting very childish.
You're the one calling people who don't happen to think that this is the issue, that just a couple of people here, including you, seem to think it is.
Even on the non-Mac sites, this isn't considered to be such a scandal.
It's absurd to say that because those of us who think it is a minor issue are thinking that Apple could do no wrong. I've put them on the carpet many times.
You don't have to pretend you are "pure" because you think this is an issue equal to what Sony did with their rootkit.
That's nonsense.
Originally posted by Anders
So many words and still no link.
I don't have much time now, having just come from a 2 1/2 hour visit to the dentist, and having to leave d=shortly, but As this is new, so that I didn't have to search, I'll supply iy.
Other than the song being clicked on, the only othrt thing being sent is the Apple ID. Since Apple already has this, as well as the complete list of all the songs you boughtt ,he only other thing they are seeing is what you are playing, or clicking on now.
While, technically, you might want to call this spyware, if you are paranoid, it hardly qualifies, in the normal sense.
The main problem is that they didn't specifically say what they were doing, even though it was pretty obvious, and far less than the Goggle bar, if you have one.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060119-6011.html
Originally posted by melgross
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060119-6011.html
I still haven't found a packet dissection anywhere. The most informative discussion I could find was this blog:
http://since1968.com/article/153/itunes-is-watching
I know people have used Ethereal to dump the packets, but I can't find anyone who's taken the time to dissect exactly what the packets contain. So any claims about what's being sent would appear to be false until proven otherwise.
Originally posted by melgross
Other than the song being clicked on, the only othrt thing being sent is the Apple ID. Since Apple already has this, as well as the complete list of all the songs you boughtt ,he only other thing they are seeing is what you are playing, or clicking on now.
Thanks.
So they ARE sending the song I listen to and nothing in the data that is sent to Apple indicates it is deleted.
And what you write is actually worse than what I thought. I only thought the song was sent and the result was sent back. With my Apple-ID they not only have an ID, but can link that ID to me specific (since an Apple ID requires registering).
So what do they have the possibility to link to me?
My IP
My physical address
My email address
The songs I bought
The songs and other material I have listened to through my computer
Nothing in this makes me any calmer, on the contrary.
Originally posted by Anders
Why this "I am happy to give Apple information of what I listen to without my knowledge because they would never do anything wrong" is fanboyism? Because a vast majority of the members here and the mac community in general has the exact opposite take on spy-ware when we didn´t get it from Apple. That people won´t accept it as spyware only proves that point.
The reason is because Apple has built a legitimate business based on other ways of generating revenue. So they would be less compelled than a smaller company such as Real Networks (for example) to sell information as it could possibly hurt their legitimate revenue stream. The small amount of monetary gain would be far outweighed by the negative publicity since they've marketed their OS against MS Windows as being less prone to spyware/adware. That's why there's a bit more trust, because there's a business case against them doing it (as opposed to a lot of other companies for whom the majority of their revenue comes from selling information).
Besides its not Apple you have to trust. Its a for me unknown marketing company called Omniture you have to trust.
So so far we have: Apple is releasing an app that without warning you sends information about the files you are listening to along with your Apple-ID to a third party marketing company I have never heard of and I should somehow feel safe because uncle Steve would never let anything bad happen to me?
Originally posted by auxio
The reason is because Apple has built a legitimate business based on other ways of generating revenue. So they would be less compelled than a smaller company such as Real Networks (for example) to sell information as it could possibly hurt their legitimate revenue stream.
The exact same thing could be said about Sony, which is a much larger company than Apple with a lot more revenue streams, yet they still went ahead and did it. Their other legitimate business practices do not somehow automagically stop them from doing something that could be illegitimate, or even spyware, as was the case with the rootkit, or in this case, MiniStore.
They're not equal in terms of seriousness and breach of privacy, but they're not that far either.
Originally posted by Anders
Thanks.
So they ARE sending the song I listen to and nothing in the data that is sent to Apple indicates it is deleted.
And what you write is actually worse than what I thought. I only thought the song was sent and the result was sent back. With my Apple-ID they not only have an ID, but can link that ID to me specific (since an Apple ID requires registering).
So what do they have the possibility to link to me?
My IP
My physical address
My email address
The songs I bought
The songs and other material I have listened to through my computer
Nothing in this makes me any calmer, on the contrary.
So then, if you give Apple information it already has, plus just songs you are clicking on, you are worried that this is serious?