Apple criticized for iPod shuffle's new 'authentication chip'

168101112

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 238
    trrosentrrosen Posts: 32member
    I don't understand why I'm the first one asking this but Why do all these people own expensive earphones but not iPods?



    I mean they are so upset that there being forced to by a new shuffle as they don't have a music player now, and only have $80. (apparently) but they have hundred dollar Shure earphones that they wont be able to use because they don't have a remote on them.



    I just don't get it??
  • Reply 142 of 238
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iName View Post


    According to MacRumors the DRM chip is only for the "Made for iPod" thingy!

    That means: No license=No label



    Absolutely - talk about people over reacting to a piece of crap 'discovery' - some of the comments have been almost hysterical.



    Chill out for gods sake.
  • Reply 143 of 238
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post


    That's a really odd response. Do you really need to see the new ipod to know things like that you lose the controls if you use generic headphones?



    For the most part those seem like valid points to me.



    Perhaps you don't have to seen them, but to suggest that the sound is poorer or most of the key features that are "missing" aren't if you did a little reading.



    The fact that is has already been communicated that their will be third-party connectors so you can use virtually ant headphone you want really belies all the concern.



    This is a $79 music player. Give it a rest.
  • Reply 144 of 238
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,382member
    This is fucking ridiculous. Fuck you, Apple. I've given this company tens of thousands of my dollars over the years, and this shit is what makes me regret it. I seriously can't believe there's people defending this. Get your heads out of your asses. There's NOTHING good about this, its simply a cynical money grab by Apple.



    Its also pathetic and humorous how some here are trying to put a positive spin on this by suggesting that controls on headphones is somehow a new thing, and that Apple is being a technological trailblazer with this. At first I realized it may have been sarcasm/satire, then I realized it wasnt. You people arent doing Apple any favors by consistently defending and apologizing for their every move.



    This is a bad, bad thing for consumers, and you should all hold Apple's feet to the fire, if you have the objectivity to do so.
  • Reply 145 of 238
    capnbobcapnbob Posts: 388member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GMHut View Post


    Twenty percent (or less) is not insignificant. But since it's not the majority, they can F off?



    Mining Apple Stores data and Made for iPod licensing data gives Apple an idea of what THEY sell in THEIR stores. It's not the best way to determine the sale of non Apple products sold over all. It may give you an idea of how many products there are available, but not their total sales from all sources. The fact that there are (as I posted somewhere before) over a hundred different sets of earphones by other mfg. sold on the Apple store seems to say there are at least enough being sold that doing so is profitable?kind of like Apple sales in general. Apple only has 10% of the market on computers and phones combined, Using your numbers, why do they even bother to exist?



    Your business acumen is simply stunning! What you and the other (some derogatory term that will be used to degrade my point ;-)) posters fail to comprehend is that your opinion is just that, YOUR opinion. It is worth next to nothing to anyone else and especially Apple. The implied belief that "you know what is best for Apple and if only someone would give you a break, you'd do a much better job than those idiots in Cupertino" is laughable.



    You think that Apple did not do usage surveys, focus groups, number crunch sales stats all ways from Sunday before investing in this new shuffle? They are making tradeoffs all the time - size, vs. traditional controls, expandability vs. simplicity, etc. based on the markets they are attacking. Apple are taking a punt on this mix of form and function based on their market analysis and strategic objectives, not on what a bunch of blowhards on AI think.



    What irks a lot of long-time posters here, is that the center of gravity for Apple is inexorably moving away from fanbois (like me), old school mac-heads, or even general geeks and will never return. That's why they cancelled MacWorld attendance (bummed), dropped consumer firewire (double bummed) etc. The vastly larger market Apple chases today doesn't care. The fact that you still do is not their problem. You won't buy a shuffle. No-one cares - not even Apple. They are betting (from their research) that for everyone who won't buy one for whatever reason, there are new buyers who will go - whoa, that's cool, I'll get me one of those. You have no influence on them.



    It's fine to whine, (I'm doing it here) but keep some perspective. Nothing any of us says makes any real difference to reality of the situation. As someone already rightly said, "The market will decide". Your stake in that is $79 x the probability that you were ever going to buy one at all.



    PS I won't buy a shuffle - I only use my own earphones - but I would deffo get an adapter when they inevitably come out (hopefully to use on my iPhone).
  • Reply 146 of 238
    trrosentrrosen Posts: 32member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rain View Post


    Did you read your post dude? It makes zero sense.

    Exactly how do you play any music without the Apple headphones?



    Are you suggesting that people carry 2 sets of headphones? One to get the music started... unplug it, plug in the next set so the music doesn't sound like shit.

    Oh... oh... lets skip that track... unplug good headphones that don't sound like shit, plug in Apple headphones, hit the next track, unplug Apple headphones, plug in good headphones that don't sound like shit.



    Yah... sounds like a great innovation. Real user friendly. .....



    Anyways who else wants to see Hana naked?



    Music starts by itself...

    If you don't like that song why did you put it on there in the first place???
  • Reply 147 of 238
    gmcalpingmcalpin Posts: 266member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GMHut View Post


    Explain how it makes sense to design a product you cary attached to yourself that requires a remote control.



    If you've got said product inside your coat, or your pocket, or strapped to your arm, and you want to leave it there and actually control it without actually having to look at it?



    There, that wasn't so hard, was it? Anyway, it's not a REMOTE control. It's THE CONTROLS.
  • Reply 148 of 238
    Where's the complaint about charging through the mic port? That means you have to use Apple's Dock like the prior shuffle. What's that? I hear nothing from the peanut gallery. Oh you don't "have" to buy a dock because one came with it. Oh.... Kinda like the headphones. Oh, but you don't like the headphones... Well give it about 1 month and there will be 10 different manufacturers offering them. Then you will have freedom. Oh, you want to use your $120 headphones you already bought. Well, Can I show you the iPod Nano? It's $70 more, but maybe that is the iPod for you. You seem like a serious audiophile anyway, and would more than likely enjoy the freedoms of a visual interface to get to your music anyway.



    Me, I personally would use these for mowing the lawn or working out, where I want the smallest iPod, and can just click on the wire to change songs. Yeah, they might not be the best headphones, but they are free, and I'm only using for an hour. I'll use my iPod Touch with my Bose headphones on the plane. I like watching TV shows and movies when I'm stuck on a plane anyway.
  • Reply 149 of 238
    mark2005mark2005 Posts: 1,158member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GMHut View Post


    Mining Apple Stores data and Made for iPod licensing data gives Apple an idea of what THEY sell in THEIR stores. It's not the best way to determine the sale of non Apple products sold over all.



    "Made for iPod" licensing data includes sales of non-Apple products sold anywhere.
  • Reply 150 of 238
    virgil-tb2virgil-tb2 Posts: 1,416member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rain View Post


    Did you read your post dude? It makes zero sense.

    Exactly how do you play any music without the Apple headphones?



    Doood!



    You plug in any set of headphones and wait for like ... a second, and the music will play.



    The shuffle itself has a hardware button for "shuffle" or "play straight through." According to what I've read, this works with any headphones. Considering most people buy a shuffle because they just want to hear a shuffled version of their library or playlist, I'd think this is pretty much the same way it always worked.



    There is no "incompatible" new headphone or headphone jack here. The new headphones can be used on old players but they lose the new features (the wire controls). The older headphones (no wire controls) can be used on the new player and neither lose nor gain anything. Because the *player* no longer has controls, you lose the controls by using an old headset on a player that has no hardware controls, but Apple has carefully arranged it so that even then, you can still *use* the old headset if you want to. They also made the old shuffle still available for those that are really peeved. This whole controversy is manufactured BS.



    Just so you know, here you reveal yourself as someone not even worth replying to. If you want to actually have an intelligent debate about this stuff, you might want to reign in your "inner teenager" a bit.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rain View Post


    ... Anyways who else wants to see Hana naked?



  • Reply 151 of 238
    inklinginkling Posts: 768member
    In my Gollum-like conversations with myself about replacing my still-functioning iPod mini, it's looking more and more like the Bad Gollum is the one wanting me to buy.



    BAD G: We wants it, my precious. We wants it.



    GOOD G.: But they're sticking us with something that means that only headphones they approve will work on our iPods. That's like buying a Ford that'll only run if you buy Ford tires. That's not right!



    BAD G: We wants it my precious. We wants it.



    GOOD G: But if we let them get away with this, what else will they DRM: hard drives, laptop batteries, video cables?... Oops they did that one already.



    BAD G: We wants it my precious. We wants it.



    GOOD G: But remember what The Master said:



    Three iPhones for the Elven-kings under the sky.

    Seven iPod shuffles for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone.

    Nine iPod nanos for Mortal Man doomed to die,

    One DRM for the Dark Lord on his dark throne

    In the land of Cupertino where the lawyers lie.

    One DRM to rule them all, One DRM to find them,

    One DRM to bring them all and in the courtroom bind them,

    In the land of Cupertino where the lawyers lie.




    BAD G: We wants it my precious. We wants it.



    --Michael W. Perry, author of Untangling Tolkien
  • Reply 152 of 238
    mark2005mark2005 Posts: 1,158member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GMHut View Post


    Twenty percent (or less) is not insignificant. But since it's not the majority, they can F off?



    Don't really know what is driving your tone, since Apple has already allowed other headphone makers to make headphones for the shuffle.



    Pure speculation, but it's highly likely that such headphones/controllers with VoiceOver would be usable with the next-gen iPhones and iPods, so Apple sees no need to rush third parties into this since its not yet ready to divulge what those next-gen iPhones and iPods are.



    It's quite likely that we can't see the whole picture, but that the shuffle is just the beginning of a wholesale change to the way all future iPods can use headphones; altho its required for the shuffle, it would be optional but highly desirable for all other iPods.
  • Reply 153 of 238
    gmcalpingmcalpin Posts: 266member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jjthomps View Post


    Where's the complaint about charging through the (headphone?) port? That means you have to use Apple's Dock like the prior shuffle. What's that? I hear nothing from the peanut gallery.



    Actually, it's not a Dock, like with the second gen! It's just an audio jack > USB cable. It's brilliant.



    I wish my second gen shuffle had one of those, because the little dock with it is an accident waiting to happen, with that oddball shape and the audio jack just sticking out like that.
  • Reply 154 of 238
    bwhalerbwhaler Posts: 260member
    Perhaps you should have done your research before writing a 2,220 word essay.



    The chip is not about DRM. Apple says you are free to use any headphones and controllers you want.



    I find it hysterical that someone did a tear down, everyone assumed it was DRM, and then millions of bits and hours have been wasted in the past day until Apple responded with what the chip does.



    Pretty sad and pathetic for a normally good site.
  • Reply 155 of 238
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post


    Get your heads out of your asses. There's NOTHING good about this, its simply a cynical money grab by Apple.



    I agree this is a way for Apple to make more money. At the same time a remote control on your headphones is a great function and Apple may have figured out a better way of doing it.



    Quote:

    Its also pathetic and humorous how some here are trying to put a positive spin on this by suggesting that controls on headphones is somehow a new thing, and that Apple is being a technological trailblazer with this. At first I realized it may have been sarcasm/satire, then I realized it wasnt. You people aren't doing Apple any favors by consistently defending and apologizing for their every move.



    Everyone knows Apple did not invent this concept. What Apple has invented is their own proprietary way of implementing this concept. It may prove to be a superior solution in comparison to others, we have to wait and see.



    Quote:

    This is a bad, bad thing for consumers, and you should all hold Apple's feet to the fire, if you have the objectivity to do so.



    Its not bad if it actually provides a better remote than others.
  • Reply 156 of 238
    mark2005mark2005 Posts: 1,158member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ttupper View Post


    This is where your argument goes south. You assume Apple's intent is to prevent someone else from making hardware for their platform, yet you have NO evidence to support that position. You seem to think the intent is to force you to use Apple headphones, rather than to force competitors to pay Apple in order to produce headphones that can be used with Apple's platform. And to be totally blunt, you don't even know if any of the above is the case; All you have, in fact, are a lot of rumors and a hot head.



    What could be happening here is this: Apple wants to extract some money from firms that want to profit from their platform. That is not the same as "Apple wants to be the only manufacturer of headphones." If you can't see that, I'm not sure what I could say that could help you... but may I say that I think your position is myopic.



    Agree mostly but rather than Apple extracting money from headphone makers, it could be that the headphone makers are working with Apple in this, as this Apple change will drive another round of headphone purchases for those who want to use the new controls on the shuffle now (and on any iPod/iPhone in the future).
  • Reply 157 of 238
    virgil-tb2virgil-tb2 Posts: 1,416member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post


    This is fucking ridiculous. Fuck you, Apple. I've given this company tens of thousands of my dollars over the years, and this shit is what makes me regret it. I seriously can't believe there's people defending this. Get your heads out of your asses. There's NOTHING good about this, its simply a cynical money grab by Apple.



    Its also pathetic and humorous how some here are trying to put a positive spin on this by suggesting that controls on headphones is somehow a new thing, and that Apple is being a technological trailblazer with this. At first I realized it may have been sarcasm/satire, then I realized it wasnt. You people arent doing Apple any favors by consistently defending and apologizing for their every move.



    This is a bad, bad thing for consumers, and you should all hold Apple's feet to the fire, if you have the objectivity to do so.



    Don't know why I even bother replying to a troll like this, but you are dead wrong in every aspect here.
    • It *is* a new thing, Apple has a patent on it.

    • The chip is in the control to process the signals, not for DRM or anything else.

    • you can't make accesories for iPod without a license

    The licence gives you the right to use their chip (that they designed and is used for the patented thing that they do where the controls are in the cable). The cable controls literally would not work if the chip wasn't in there doing the thing that makes it work.



    There is no DRM here, no "hardware DRM" (whatever that even means), and nothing happening that is even remotely unusual in regards third party licensing and accessories. It's just a slow news day and iLounge and Ars and a few others have decided to manufacture a story out of thin air for the occaision.
  • Reply 158 of 238
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post


    This is fucking ridiculous. Fuck you, Apple. I've given this company tens of thousands of my dollars over the years, and this shit is what makes me regret it. I seriously can't believe there's people defending this. Get your heads out of your asses. There's NOTHING good about this, its simply a cynical money grab by Apple.



    Its also pathetic and humorous how some here are trying to put a positive spin on this by suggesting that controls on headphones is somehow a new thing, and that Apple is being a technological trailblazer with this. At first I realized it may have been sarcasm/satire, then I realized it wasnt. You people arent doing Apple any favors by consistently defending and apologizing for their every move.



    This is a bad, bad thing for consumers, and you should all hold Apple's feet to the fire, if you have the objectivity to do so.



    1. Apple's business model does not include "money grab" tactics, they are into creating customer loyalty. They try to build innovative, dependable products and earn their good reputation.



    2. There is nothing bad for consumers here because consumers have dozens of other players that they can purchase instead.



    3. Just because you have spent x-amount of cash on Apple products doesn't mean you know what type of devices other people want.



    4. Always the same bottom line. Don't like the new <insert product name> don't buy it.
  • Reply 159 of 238
    cycomikocycomiko Posts: 716member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    Are you saying that wherever you go, you don't carry any connectors and expect that they will be universally available at your beckoning call?



    why carry a connector when its on the unit?



  • Reply 160 of 238
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ttupper View Post


    You are simply wrong, Vinea. I know this to be a fact because we just went through a purchasing round and we just bought MSDN licenses for our developers. Tell me, do you develop software for a living? Do you have anything to do with purchasing in your company? If not, then let me say, you aren't qualified to be making the statements you are.



    Yes and yes. If you spent $10K/seat/year you just got robbed.



    Quote:

    Let me also point out something you said: "The dev tools are very inexpensive ranging from free to $18K". I agree that free is inexpensive. I don't think anyone would agree that 18K is inexpensive. You also creatively ignored the fact that many of these licenses are per seat licenses, which isn't cheap when you have 20 engineers, even if the cost is the $1034 amazon charges for VS2008 pro + MSDN Pro (which ISN'T an MSDN subscription).



    Here is the current MSDN pricing:



    http://www.software-intl.com/content...ription-Coupon



    With MSDN Pro you get SQL Server, Operating Systems, Toolkits, SDKs, DDKs and 2 tech support incidents.



    With MSDN Premium you also get Servers, Office, and Expression and 2 more tech support incidents.



    MSDN Pro IS a MSDN subscription. Just a lower tier.



    For 20 engineers, assuming you want MSDN for all of them, is about $16K for TWO years using the SWI promo pricing and VS Pro + MSDN Pro. It's about $22K for THREE years.



    Quote:

    And again, I challenge you to prove to me that you know what you are talking about, because I do. And I can tell you, buying MSDN developer seats is not cheap, no matter what you want to say. It is not free, which is what you seem to think it should be to develop hardware for Apple's platform.



    As a developer who has worked for both large and small companies I know how much MS development costs. MSDN is NOT a requirement to ship product. It's a nice to have that often saves money because of the licenses it includes for development and testing.



    You can, as a small shop, JUST use Visual Studio Standard and make do. Many small shops do, although most will just go with Pro and maybe get one or two MSDN subscriptions.



    Quote:

    I think to accuse me of spreading FUD was a bit over the top and totally untrue. My point, that companies charge for the opportunity to develop for their platforms, is true and you admitted it yourself when you acknowledged that the price for MS developer tools can range up to 18K, even if your admission was wrapped up in a bunch of pointless vitriol.



    $18K for Team Suite over 3 years...currently $15,225 on discount. That's $5K/year/developer. If you paid $10K/developer then you're the one who doesn't know what you're talking about or doing. And heck, that's BEFORE the $1000 rebate. You should have paid $14,225 for three years of MSDN after MS rebate.



    And again, this is for the top end suite with the top end MSDN. Yes, what you wrote IS FUD because it states an absurdly high price for MS development in comparison to Apple development (yes, I am both a MSDN subscriber and Apple developer).



    MS does not charge $10K/year JUST to develop on the platform. If you want additional services they will gladly sell it to you but it is NOT a requirement.



    Quote:

    I really don't get the point of your diatribe. You didn't disprove my point (or even address it, actually), you admitted that prices range up to 18K (which is $8000 MORE than I had stated), and you succeeded in making it evident for everyone else here that you aren't capable of having a rational discussion or of even being in the least bit civil in your discourse. Kudos to you!



    Because I get irate when folks accuse MS of doing things they aren't doing that are completely false. MS charges $0 for VS Studio Express. If you bothered to even look that up you'd know that.



    And if you just spent double the going rate for VS + MSDN then kudos to you buddy. And if you can't understand that $18K for 3 years is cheaper than $10K for one year that might go a long way in understanding how you got rooked.
Sign In or Register to comment.