It's utterly amazing that's what you got from his statement.
There has been so much miscommunication in these forums today from what I’d call very clear statements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep
i is nyc short hand for 1 or one
Christian Bale has something to say to you…
Am I going to walk around and fix your f@#king grammar, in the middle of a thread? Then why the f@#k are you not using proper grammar? Ah-da-da-dah, all in the thread. What the f@#k is it with you? What don't you f@#king understand?
You got any f@#king idea about, hey, it's f@#king distracting having somebody posting poor sentence structure in the middle of a thread? Give me a f@#king answer! What don't you get about it? Ohhhhh, goooood for you. And how was the post? I hope it was f@#king good, because the thread is useless now, isn't it? f@#k’s sake man, you're amateur.
Admins, you got f@#king something to say to this prick? Well, somebody should be f@#king watching and keeping an eye on him. It’s the 190th time that he doesn't give a f@#k about what is going on in the thread, all right? I'm trying to f@#king do a post here, and I am going "What the f@#k is Bruce writing on there? What is he doing there?" Do you understand my mind is not on the article if you're doing that?
Stay off the f@#king thread man. For Christ’s sake. Alright, let's go again. Let's not take a f@#king minute, let's go again. I’m going to f@#king kick your f@#king ass if you don’t use proper sentence structure for a second! All right? I’m going to go... Do you want me to f@#king go trash your synax? Do you want me to f@#king trash ‘em Then why are you trashing this thread? You are trashing this thread!
You do it one more f@#king time and I ain’t posting on this thread if you're still here. I’m f@#king serious. You're a nice guy. You're a nice guy, but that don’t f@#king cut it when you’re a native English speaker on this forum.
I also wish Pre users the best of luck in accessing App Store content and playing iTunes Store's feature-length movies and TV shows.
Who said it would play this content? Are you making shit up as you go along? It will play non-DRM'd content. So what is the big deal. Nokia and a few others 3rd party apps have had access to iTunes for quite a while. You don't need iTunes to play all content, just DRM'd content. Is it that hard to understand?
If Apple stop this then shame on them. I for one welcome this. Apple should provide an API for all music player makers, so they can have the iTunes experience, just like the iPod. Apple should compete by making the best product, not by tying everyone else off from iTunes. It's sometimes nice to be liked too. That in itself brings business and improves your company image. Even the Apple haters would congratulate Apple on this one, which would be a clever move.
An when all said ?all music player makers? devices stop working, who has to field all the tech support.
Apple.
Who starts having to schedule iTunes releases around whims of said ?all music player makers??
Apple.
Who loses iPod sales to said ?all music player makers??
An when all said “all music player makers” devices stop working, who has to field all the tech support.
Apple.
Who starts having to schedule iTunes releases around whims of said ”all music player makers”?
Apple.
Who loses iPod sales to said “all music player makers”?
Apple.
A lot of cost and pain, not much gain.
If Twitteriffic is buggy I don't blame Twitter. Provide an API, use it themselves, and let the iPod be the example, and proof it can work seamlessly. If the other player isn't as seamless, then it will sell more iPods. Simple as. And even if the other guy adamantly resists the iPod, he can still use iTunes, and Apple can sell him music and movies - which Apple makes money from. Although they say they don't, I've seen a few Apple die-hards do their homework on this. Apple is making a lot more money from iTunes than it lets on. Even if they don't sell them the music player it can keep them in the loop, and possible even sell them an iPod or two in the future. The time will come when iTunes gets more stiff competition, before that point comes, by providing an API they would stifle the iTunes competition. And continue to sell the best music player and phone on the market.
Everyone will call this suggestion crazy, until Apple does it. We'll see what happens. The only big deal here would be an image lift for Apple. It wouldn't change the sales of the players on any dramatic level at all I'd bet. The iPod would continue to dominate, and iTunes.app would get more widespread use and downloads.
"Actually I like this iTunes. I wouldn't mind checking out some other Apple stuff."
Although people always say stuff about Apple having chips in their stuff that make them purposely incompatible with other devices or software, or that they engineer their hardware to only work with certain things or to block other certain things, I can't think of a single verified example over the last ten or fifteen years when this has actually been true.
People always assume this is the case, probably because other players like Microsoft do this regularly, but AFAIK this has simply never been true except in the case of DRM'ed stuff that has been forced upon them by other companies or the market itself.
Apple is (despite the popular misconceptions about it) actually a very open company in terms of the interoperability of it's products.
I pretty much agree 100% with your assessment. I have been using the Nokia Media Transfer for quite some time to take my iTunes (non-DRM'd, and iPhoto -yes iPhoto) content and put it on my Nokia phone. Easy as pie. What is the big deal about someone else having access to iTunes? My God, the iBoys and Appleistas are really in a tizzy over this.
The fact that iTunes music is virtually DRM free should be welcomed by all.
No, it does not. No movies, no tv shows, and most importantly, no apps. It also won't sync contacts, calendar, or photos. It also won't perform upgrades or backups. You can transfer podcasts, but it won't be "seamless".
What it will do, is allow music from your iTunes library, whether ripped, pirated, bought as iTunes Plus, or downloaded elsewhere without DRM, to be transferred to the Palm Pre, just like many, many, other devices have been able to do for a long time now.
And no, this isn't going to be a surprise to Apple. Apple is the one who put the code into iTunes to enable this for multiple devices. Apple created the code, and Apple can take the code out in future releases of iTunes.
There has been so much miscommunication in these forums today from what I?d call very clear statements.
Christian Bale has something to say to you?
Am I going to walk around and fix your f@#king grammar, in the middle of a thread? Then why the f@#k are you not using proper grammar? Ah-da-da-dah, all in the thread. What the f@#k is it with you? What don't you f@#king understand?
You got any f@#king idea about, hey, it's f@#king distracting having somebody posting poor sentence structure in the middle of a thread? Give me a f@#king answer! What don't you get about it? Ohhhhh, goooood for you. And how was the post? I hope it was f@#king good, because the thread is useless now, isn't it? f@#k?s sake man, you're amateur.
Admins, you got f@#king something to say to this prick? Well, somebody should be f@#king watching and keeping an eye on him. It?s the 190th time that he doesn't give a f@#k about what is going on in the thread, all right? I'm trying to f@#king do a post here, and I am going "What the f@#k is Bruce writing on there? What is he doing there?" Do you understand my mind is not on the article if you're doing that?
Stay off the f@#king thread man. For Christ?s sake. Alright, let's go again. Let's not take a f@#king minute, let's go again. I?m going to f@#king kick your f@#king ass if you don?t use proper sentence structure for a second! All right? I?m going to go... Do you want me to f@#king go trash your synax? Do you want me to f@#king trash ?em Then why are you trashing this thread? You are trashing this thread!
You do it one more f@#king time and I ain?t posting on this thread if you're still here. I?m f@#king serious. You're a nice guy. You're a nice guy, but that don?t f@#king cut it when you?re a native English speaker on this forum.
I couldn?t resist, I hope you?ve heard this prior to my post. If not, the first link is the original and the second is the Family Guy spoof.
No i never heard this this before .
I have been using spellcheck. Sadly I broke it . My english is so bad I crashed it. Any way I have no idea what sentence structure is .I mean I know what it is. I just don't know how to do it. But I also see I am not the only one here with poor skills. But that's no excuse,is it .
My shrink says I think to fast for my hands to type. That may be true . I guess I should go away since I am annoying to read. I tend to write my posts exactly like I would speak on the phone .
Let me know what I should due .I am tired of this now.
If Twitteriffic is buggy I don't blame Twitter. Provide an API, use it themselves, and let the iPod be the example, and proof it can work seamlessly. If the other player isn't as seamless, then it will sell more iPods. Simple as. And even if the other guy adamantly resists the iPod, he can still use iTunes, and Apple can sell him music and movies ? which Apple makes money from. Although they say they don't, I've seen a few Apple die-hards do their homework on this. Apple is making a lot more money from iTunes than it lets on. Even if they don't sell them the music player it can keep them in the loop, and possible even sell them an iPod or two in the future. The time will come when iTunes gets more stiff competition, before that point comes, by providing an API they would stifle the iTunes competition. And continue to sell the best music player and phone on the market.
Everyone will call this suggestion crazy, until Apple does it. We'll see what happens. The only big deal here would be an image lift for Apple. It wouldn't change the sales of the players on any dramatic level at all I'd bet. The iPod would continue to dominate, and iTunes.app would get more widespread use and downloads.
"Actually I like this iTunes. I wouldn't mind checking out some other Apple stuff."
APPLE may lose money on itunes . The software is free. The store charges very little for songs. The world-wide bandwidth charges alone must have a very high cost and all those free podcasts they carry . For free. This business model is two pronged . One by charging so little it gets their clients who buy their hardware to visit a lot .
Two By charging so little no one else can make a store and make money. How many failed attempts litter the highway already . Anyone hosting a store is bleeding money and does it only as loss-leader
For itunes to make a profit they have to reach a tipping point . Maybe ten times what they do now . Maybe . The bandwidth is still a killer expense . There new server farms should defray some cost .
Although people always say stuff about Apple having chips in their stuff that make them purposely incompatible with other devices or software, or that they engineer their hardware to only work with certain things or to block other certain things, I can't think of a single verified example over the last ten or fifteen years when this has actually been true.
iMac G4s, eMacs and various iBooks could only drive one display (although a mirrored external could be connected). To get a second extended desktop display a simple firmware hack was required. Apple must have deliberately chosen to limit this feature on it's consumer Macs.
I'm not suggesting that any other rumours about incompatibilities or blocking is true but 'never' isn't the case.
If Apple stop this then shame on them. I for one welcome this. Apple should provide an API for all music player makers, so they can have the iTunes experience, just like the iPod. Apple should compete by making the best product, not by tying everyone else off from iTunes. It's sometimes nice to be liked too. That in itself brings business and improves your company image. Even the Apple haters would congratulate Apple on this one, which would be a clever move.
Even if Apple did do this, the haters would turn a blind eye to it and hate on something else. It doesn't matter which platform, or whatever it is you hate, you will almost never see the good in something you hate.
APPLE may lose money on itunes . The software is free. The store charges very little for songs.
This isn't my opinion. Do your research. See what that Gruber lark has to say on the matter. Others too. When Apple says they don't make much money from iTunes, they are lying.
Even if Apple did do this, the haters would turn a blind eye to it and hate on something else. It doesn't matter which platform, or whatever it is you hate, you will almost never see the good in something you hate.
I disagree, and agree to an extant also. This is not the primary reason to do it though, it would merely be an added bonus. The main reasons are to give Apple an image lift in general, broadly speaking, before they eventually are probably forced to do something like this, by law - and that is not out of the realms of possibility. They can do what they want, it's their software, to a limit. In a way, they are stifling competition, however you spin it. By doing this they can breath and compete where they compete best - by making the best stuff! The best products. The other thing is, this move would also stop others stepping on their iTunes turf. Making it "open" stops others threading on them, it makes them more invincible in this space, and rest-assured iTunes is the key here. Especially when they "attack" (horrible word to use, I know) the living room.
Doing this shows Apple to be brave. People will notice it too. They would probably end up selling more iPods as a result, wouldn't surprise me. Those who won't buy an iPod, will continue on their merry way, but now they "might" use iTunes to manage their player, which is a step in the right direction for Apple. You can't please everybody, and you shouldn't try to - but being needlessly closed in general is not good......... eventually. That thinking almost killed Apple in the 80's. Steve says they have learned that lesson, but have they? Have they actually changed all that much? I don't think they have, well not enough anyway. They are doing a lot of things right, but are doing a few things wrong, and on a major level. Me(dot)com/.Mac is an example where Apple are almost-clueless. It's as if "they just don't get it".
I don't think Apple makes much of anything at all on iTunes music sales, once their costs are factored in, so the "no problem just makes more money for them" argument doesn't really hold.
Nevertheless, purchasing music and managing your music library just one part of the current iTunes Store colossus, so it's not as if the Pre will be making off with the full range of Apple functionality or anything.
I don't think Apple makes much of anything at all on iTunes music sales, once their costs are factored in, so the "no problem just makes more money for them" argument doesn't really hold.
That's just the problem - most people "don't think" Apple are making money from iTunes. But.... they are. Gruber did one of the more intelligent pieces on that subject, not that I want to make his head any bigger than it already is.
Actually I have finally found one feature on the Pre I like... they have a "reminders" feature that you can attach to someone in your Contacts, and the next time you get in touch with them (perhaps only on phone calls, who knows) it pops up the reminder. I think this is great, I'd use it all the time!
Cupertino, fire up your photocopiers!
Maury
Naaah. Steve jobs will come back to his office just in time to explain Apple's followers they don't need such feature - and problem solved!
Comments
This is great, but I'm sure I've heard about some Creative players natively interfacing with iTunes before.
See this -> http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2172
It works fine with Creative Nomads & Muvos, SonicBlue Rios, Nike psaplay and Nakamichi Soundspace.
It's utterly amazing that's what you got from his statement.
There has been so much miscommunication in these forums today from what I’d call very clear statements.
i is nyc short hand for 1 or one
Christian Bale has something to say to you…
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2172
EDIT... too slow Chris CA beat me to it.
So?
Apple can disable this if they like.
I also wish Pre users the best of luck in accessing App Store content and playing iTunes Store's feature-length movies and TV shows.
Who said it would play this content? Are you making shit up as you go along? It will play non-DRM'd content. So what is the big deal. Nokia and a few others 3rd party apps have had access to iTunes for quite a while. You don't need iTunes to play all content, just DRM'd content. Is it that hard to understand?
If Apple stop this then shame on them. I for one welcome this. Apple should provide an API for all music player makers, so they can have the iTunes experience, just like the iPod. Apple should compete by making the best product, not by tying everyone else off from iTunes. It's sometimes nice to be liked too. That in itself brings business and improves your company image. Even the Apple haters would congratulate Apple on this one, which would be a clever move.
An when all said ?all music player makers? devices stop working, who has to field all the tech support.
Apple.
Who starts having to schedule iTunes releases around whims of said ?all music player makers??
Apple.
Who loses iPod sales to said ?all music player makers??
Apple.
A lot of cost and pain, not much gain.
An when all said “all music player makers” devices stop working, who has to field all the tech support.
Apple.
Who starts having to schedule iTunes releases around whims of said ”all music player makers”?
Apple.
Who loses iPod sales to said “all music player makers”?
Apple.
A lot of cost and pain, not much gain.
If Twitteriffic is buggy I don't blame Twitter. Provide an API, use it themselves, and let the iPod be the example, and proof it can work seamlessly. If the other player isn't as seamless, then it will sell more iPods. Simple as. And even if the other guy adamantly resists the iPod, he can still use iTunes, and Apple can sell him music and movies - which Apple makes money from. Although they say they don't, I've seen a few Apple die-hards do their homework on this. Apple is making a lot more money from iTunes than it lets on. Even if they don't sell them the music player it can keep them in the loop, and possible even sell them an iPod or two in the future. The time will come when iTunes gets more stiff competition, before that point comes, by providing an API they would stifle the iTunes competition. And continue to sell the best music player and phone on the market.
Everyone will call this suggestion crazy, until Apple does it. We'll see what happens. The only big deal here would be an image lift for Apple. It wouldn't change the sales of the players on any dramatic level at all I'd bet. The iPod would continue to dominate, and iTunes.app would get more widespread use and downloads.
"Actually I like this iTunes. I wouldn't mind checking out some other Apple stuff."
Nokia with symbian is like a bad car with square tires, it could be bad, but is even worse.
I wonder how many hours it took you to come up with this gem.
Just to be pedantic...
To my knowledge Apple has never done this.
Although people always say stuff about Apple having chips in their stuff that make them purposely incompatible with other devices or software, or that they engineer their hardware to only work with certain things or to block other certain things, I can't think of a single verified example over the last ten or fifteen years when this has actually been true.
People always assume this is the case, probably because other players like Microsoft do this regularly, but AFAIK this has simply never been true except in the case of DRM'ed stuff that has been forced upon them by other companies or the market itself.
Apple is (despite the popular misconceptions about it) actually a very open company in terms of the interoperability of it's products.
I pretty much agree 100% with your assessment. I have been using the Nokia Media Transfer for quite some time to take my iTunes (non-DRM'd, and iPhoto -yes iPhoto) content and put it on my Nokia phone. Easy as pie. What is the big deal about someone else having access to iTunes? My God, the iBoys and Appleistas are really in a tizzy over this.
The fact that iTunes music is virtually DRM free should be welcomed by all.
What it will do, is allow music from your iTunes library, whether ripped, pirated, bought as iTunes Plus, or downloaded elsewhere without DRM, to be transferred to the Palm Pre, just like many, many, other devices have been able to do for a long time now.
And no, this isn't going to be a surprise to Apple. Apple is the one who put the code into iTunes to enable this for multiple devices. Apple created the code, and Apple can take the code out in future releases of iTunes.
There has been so much miscommunication in these forums today from what I?d call very clear statements.
Christian Bale has something to say to you?
I couldn?t resist, I hope you?ve heard this prior to my post. If not, the first link is the original and the second is the Family Guy spoof.
No i never heard this this before .
I have been using spellcheck. Sadly I broke it . My english is so bad I crashed it. Any way I have no idea what sentence structure is .I mean I know what it is. I just don't know how to do it. But I also see I am not the only one here with poor skills. But that's no excuse,is it .
My shrink says I think to fast for my hands to type. That may be true . I guess I should go away since I am annoying to read. I tend to write my posts exactly like I would speak on the phone .
Let me know what I should due .I am tired of this now.
PEACE
9
If Twitteriffic is buggy I don't blame Twitter. Provide an API, use it themselves, and let the iPod be the example, and proof it can work seamlessly. If the other player isn't as seamless, then it will sell more iPods. Simple as. And even if the other guy adamantly resists the iPod, he can still use iTunes, and Apple can sell him music and movies ? which Apple makes money from. Although they say they don't, I've seen a few Apple die-hards do their homework on this. Apple is making a lot more money from iTunes than it lets on. Even if they don't sell them the music player it can keep them in the loop, and possible even sell them an iPod or two in the future. The time will come when iTunes gets more stiff competition, before that point comes, by providing an API they would stifle the iTunes competition. And continue to sell the best music player and phone on the market.
Everyone will call this suggestion crazy, until Apple does it. We'll see what happens. The only big deal here would be an image lift for Apple. It wouldn't change the sales of the players on any dramatic level at all I'd bet. The iPod would continue to dominate, and iTunes.app would get more widespread use and downloads.
"Actually I like this iTunes. I wouldn't mind checking out some other Apple stuff."
APPLE may lose money on itunes . The software is free. The store charges very little for songs. The world-wide bandwidth charges alone must have a very high cost and all those free podcasts they carry . For free. This business model is two pronged . One by charging so little it gets their clients who buy their hardware to visit a lot .
Two By charging so little no one else can make a store and make money. How many failed attempts litter the highway already . Anyone hosting a store is bleeding money and does it only as loss-leader
For itunes to make a profit they have to reach a tipping point . Maybe ten times what they do now . Maybe . The bandwidth is still a killer expense . There new server farms should defray some cost .
When did they call it ibillion??
After they morphed from Apple to Sony to McDonald's.
Just to be pedantic...
To my knowledge Apple has never done this.
Although people always say stuff about Apple having chips in their stuff that make them purposely incompatible with other devices or software, or that they engineer their hardware to only work with certain things or to block other certain things, I can't think of a single verified example over the last ten or fifteen years when this has actually been true.
iMac G4s, eMacs and various iBooks could only drive one display (although a mirrored external could be connected). To get a second extended desktop display a simple firmware hack was required. Apple must have deliberately chosen to limit this feature on it's consumer Macs.
I'm not suggesting that any other rumours about incompatibilities or blocking is true but 'never' isn't the case.
If Apple stop this then shame on them. I for one welcome this. Apple should provide an API for all music player makers, so they can have the iTunes experience, just like the iPod. Apple should compete by making the best product, not by tying everyone else off from iTunes. It's sometimes nice to be liked too. That in itself brings business and improves your company image. Even the Apple haters would congratulate Apple on this one, which would be a clever move.
Even if Apple did do this, the haters would turn a blind eye to it and hate on something else. It doesn't matter which platform, or whatever it is you hate, you will almost never see the good in something you hate.
APPLE may lose money on itunes . The software is free. The store charges very little for songs.
This isn't my opinion. Do your research. See what that Gruber lark has to say on the matter. Others too. When Apple says they don't make much money from iTunes, they are lying.
Even if Apple did do this, the haters would turn a blind eye to it and hate on something else. It doesn't matter which platform, or whatever it is you hate, you will almost never see the good in something you hate.
I disagree, and agree to an extant also. This is not the primary reason to do it though, it would merely be an added bonus. The main reasons are to give Apple an image lift in general, broadly speaking, before they eventually are probably forced to do something like this, by law - and that is not out of the realms of possibility. They can do what they want, it's their software, to a limit. In a way, they are stifling competition, however you spin it. By doing this they can breath and compete where they compete best - by making the best stuff! The best products. The other thing is, this move would also stop others stepping on their iTunes turf. Making it "open" stops others threading on them, it makes them more invincible in this space, and rest-assured iTunes is the key here. Especially when they "attack" (horrible word to use, I know) the living room.
Doing this shows Apple to be brave. People will notice it too. They would probably end up selling more iPods as a result, wouldn't surprise me. Those who won't buy an iPod, will continue on their merry way, but now they "might" use iTunes to manage their player, which is a step in the right direction for Apple. You can't please everybody, and you shouldn't try to - but being needlessly closed in general is not good......... eventually. That thinking almost killed Apple in the 80's. Steve says they have learned that lesson, but have they? Have they actually changed all that much? I don't think they have, well not enough anyway. They are doing a lot of things right, but are doing a few things wrong, and on a major level. Me(dot)com/.Mac is an example where Apple are almost-clueless. It's as if "they just don't get it".
Nevertheless, purchasing music and managing your music library just one part of the current iTunes Store colossus, so it's not as if the Pre will be making off with the full range of Apple functionality or anything.
I don't think Apple makes much of anything at all on iTunes music sales, once their costs are factored in, so the "no problem just makes more money for them" argument doesn't really hold.
That's just the problem - most people "don't think" Apple are making money from iTunes. But.... they are. Gruber did one of the more intelligent pieces on that subject, not that I want to make his head any bigger than it already is.
> just like an iPhone
Wow, sterling praise indeed.
Actually I have finally found one feature on the Pre I like... they have a "reminders" feature that you can attach to someone in your Contacts, and the next time you get in touch with them (perhaps only on phone calls, who knows) it pops up the reminder. I think this is great, I'd use it all the time!
Cupertino, fire up your photocopiers!
Maury
Naaah. Steve jobs will come back to his office just in time to explain Apple's followers they don't need such feature - and problem solved!