Apple Updates, Cripples iTunes 653
A user writes "Apple has issued an update to iTunes 4, iTunes 4.0.1. It can be downloaded via Software Update. The big change seems to be that iTunes will now only stream music to other Macs on the same subnet. This is presumably a response to people publishing public lists of shared iTunes playlists, though it does mean that anyone wanting to stream music from home to work or vice versa is SOL. Oh well." You can't share between 4.0 and 4.0.1 iTunes, so be careful in updating. AppleScript access to shared playlist tracks is fixed, though. Woop woop.
VPNs (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:VPNs (Score:5, Interesting)
Certainly, or use SSH port forwarding.
Re:VPNs (Score:2, Interesting)
Anyone tested to see if this works - especially the ssh tunneling?
Re:VPNs (Score:5, Interesting)
Are there some good hackers around... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:So, what ever happened to CD-Rs? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:And so it begins (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple is rapidly approaching a point that their only saving grace is that there is nary a hint that Apple is actively maintaining rights to my Mac to disable any software that may do this, if iTunes 4 won't - such as in XP, w2k, etc.
If/when that happens, then yeah, i will remove X and install YDL on the whole damn hard drive.
what they should have done (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Here We Go Again (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm an iTunes user, and I say its music sharing is crippled. I don't care what apple's intentions are, if I can no longer use a tool for the purpose I keep it around for, then it's crippled, at least from a semantic standpoint.
Apple worked very hard to get the RIAA to soften up as much as it has with DRM in the iTunes Music Store.
"As much as it has"? Dude, the mp3-streaming thing was just about the only thing that separated Apple's DRM from the DRM schemes on previous pay-for-online-music services. There have been a number of limited-location install schemes where you could only listen to the mp3s on one platform in one music player that you could buy music through before, but iTunes was different because you could go somewhere else and still *listen* to the music, even if it wasn't local. Not anymore.
If you don't like the terms, don't buy the music.
OK.
Re:So, what ever happened to CD-Rs? (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes, that's sarcasm. Do your companies know that you are wasting their bandwidth and money on music streaming? That would not be tolerated here. It could lead to disciplinary action or even dismissal.
Re:fair use? (Score:3, Interesting)
And most of the music I have to share are MP3s from my own CDs. I actually don't have any pirated music in my collection (well, maybe 2-3 songs... but that's all). It has nothing to do with authorization, in my case, but rather sharing.
I know that there are strong legal reasons, but the paranoia in me can't help wonder what this change will do to sales of the iPods. Could it possibly drive up sales as the only method to make your music portable? Hmmm...
This change is truly disappointing to me.
-Alex
Netjuke is not a 'player' ...client is on you (Score:4, Interesting)
Did you go to the site and check it out [sourceforge.net]? Netjuke simply provides mtu's (or streams, in conjunction with ShoutCast, QTTS, etc.)....the 'play' ability depends on the player on the client side. It is a web based interface, and if your OS and client support a given format you're good to go. We already know how to convert AAC files...
Re:VPNs (Score:1, Interesting)
It seems like this would break down, but it usually doesn't. And when it does, restarting the outmost ssh (the one with the ppp going over it) is all it takes to get back online. If the ip's are the same, the inner ssh connections are usually persistant enough to stay alive.
This post is going over an ssh -D socks proxy, which in turn is going over a ppp over ssh tunnel. So thats IP( TCP( SSH( PPP( IP( TCP( SSH( SOCKS( TCP( HTTP ))))))))) 9 layers of encapsulation where there would usually be IP( TCP( HTTP)) 2. And you know what? I've been wasting time on slashdot like this all morning, without trouble. And, thanks to ssh, nobody at work sees anything but port 22 traffic coming from my port on the switch!
Hmm (Score:2, Interesting)
Shared office music library. Push your copanies T3 line to the max.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
It supports AAC (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Nope, this update makes sense (Score:2, Interesting)
well then (Score:0, Interesting)
Re:VPNs (Score:3, Interesting)
Tunneling iTunes is a solution to a problem create (Score:1, Interesting)
No you're not (yet). But this simple move by Apple demonstrates that they can and will restrict rights to music you bought.
There was no need to tunnel stuff, the need has been created by Apple to prevent piracy, but it also restricts fair use.
There's no garantee that they're not gonna restrict your rights further. This just shows owning the music is better than any DRM solution. What if my Mac died and all I have left is linux-PC with 3000 songs I can't listen to anymore?
Re:VPNs (Score:2, Interesting)
I never said was unique to ssh, besides not any tunneling protocol will suffer the same degradation. Like I said, for example cipe
is UDP based simple tunnel.
Sadly in all implementation of TCP that I'm aware of there are no parameters. But when you think about it the whole TCP as-is, was never developed to be run on reliable medium and no simple parametrization will help there. When run on reliable transport the whole sendwindow and timer mechanisms should be altered.
Point being, tcp is not meant for reliable transports and there are no simple tweaks for that either.
Re:Tunneling iTunes is a solution to a problem cre (Score:5, Interesting)
You can still play your AAC files purchaced from the iTunes Music Store, even if you Mac "died" (as you put it). For that matter, you can archive all of those files as either AAC or AIFF files on any media you chose, including the HD of your Linux PC (which should be able to support AAC "any day now")
You seem to have this crazy notion that AAC is another Windows Media Player file alternative, created solely to place ultra restrictions on files and force you to "rent" music rather than purchace it (as a new Microsoft music service is expected to do in a few months). Nothing could be further from the truth. AAC was invented at Dolby for the purpose of offering a better compression algorythm than MP3, and it succeeds briliantly. At a bit-rate of 128, it sounds as good or better than a 192 VBR MP3. Yes, it stores some information in the DRM layer... this is exactly why it will become the new standard. It permits fair use (archiving, copying to other sources, listening on other playback equipment, sharing it with close friends) without allowing you to freely rip off and distribute the files they sell you (and are trying to sell to others) to the entire world.
Kindly offer one example of "fair use" which is prevented by the DRM restrictions Apple places on the files they sell you (and only the files they sell you). Here's a little help: "Fair Use," according to US copyright law, includes the right to make back-ups, to make copies to other media, to extract samples for educational use. Fare Use does not include the right to make copies available to other people, although the files sold by Apple actually allow that on a limited basis.
Now, which Fair Use rights do you think we are being denied? We are all very anxious to hear this.
Re:New bug fix, more restrictive? (Score:5, Interesting)
If I had mod points to give, one would be yours, FRB.
When I first heard about the iTunes streaming service, I immidiately began speculating about the many ways I would use it. The thought of accessing all of my music from all over my house and even at work, while keeping it all stored on HD that's shared out to everywhere else I go... it seemed like a new Golden Age was dawning.
But then, for the sake of my CD-less car stereo and listening to music while jogging, I bought an iPod. Once I had the iPod, all these thoughts of streaming completely vanished. I've got my entire record collection in my hip pocket at all times now, and I can listen to it on any music device that I can extend a stereo mini-jack from (which, thanks to RCA-to-mini cables, FM transmitters, and those tape adapter thingies, means damned near everything that has speakers.) Screw streaming from a server... I would need another computer running iTunes to do that. The iPod is the music library now. Every time I get another album (or cave into the desire to download a song off iTMS,) I just rip to my main computer, and sync the iPod to it in a matter of seconds next time I plug in the Firewire cable (which won't be long, since that's how I recharge the iPod 90% of the time).
I had friends parrot the "iPod will change the way you listen to music," hype to me over the past year or so... and now that I have an iPod, I see the light. You can call us all "pod people" if you like, (or "iPod people"... hmm, "iPeople?") but this tiny little gadget actually was a bigger revolution than I really expected it to be before buying it. Those of you who haven't acquired an iPod yet probably think I'm crazy, but iTunes for Windows comes out at the end of this year and the rest of the world will catch up. I'll see you when you get here. I now value my cheap little iPod more than my car or my TV. The hype was not a lie.
Fuck streaming.
There are definitely two view points expressed (Score:3, Interesting)
The other is from the DRM hater who believes all music should be free and was gunning for Apple from the moment they announced they'd be charging for music and you wouldn't automatically get mailed CD copies to hand out to strangers in the street.
I'd like to position myself between these two camps. I'm not a great lover of Macs, but I do have a sneaking admiration for Apple. Apple are the first company that has actually managed to bring the record labels together and produce a service that actually does work. You can search for a tune you want, click and it's in your ears on your Ipod on your way to work the next morning - all legitimately, artists having been paid etc etc.
The problem as a few people have touched upon is that this update could be the tip of the iceberg - they've changed the way my software operates at the behest of some evil RIAA request, does this mean they'll cave into every whim of them in furutre?
So far Apple have closed an undocumented 'feature' of their previous offering. They never said you'd be able to do it, so you can't sue them now they've closed it. If you don't like it, don't upgrade, stop using ITunes, put a masonary spike through your ipod and post it back to Steve - otherwise quit whinging.
Do half of you have a clue what sharing is? (Score:3, Interesting)
Let's look at it this way. What do you define as sharing?
1) You've got your window open, blaring your radio the 5-person crowd on the street. THIS is iTunes sharing...
2) You've got your stereo on and are copying your music collection to cd, then placing them on the window sill for anyone to take. Or worse, people are reaching in, up to 5 at a time, and taking those cds without asking you. THIS is what Apple stopped.
I can't see why this is hard to understand - in the second scenario, you're either distributing or being stolen from, and that's all that's changed.
You can still tunnel to the Mac if you want, and you can still set up web sharing to give out your music if you want. But *you* have to do it - Apple won't do it for you!
And can you blame them? (Obviously, some can...maybe we need to start teaching civics and ethics again).
What do people expect? (Score:3, Interesting)
Stop messing around with iTunes, port numbers, SSH, etc...
Is this not what an iPod is for? (Score:2, Interesting)
carry my tunes with anywhere I went, work, train,
plane, beach, rental car, bicycle, Segway, 4-wheeler,
Ski-Do, hang glider, etc.
Why do I need to stream my music to work? Think about it,
all the other defenses of Apple make sense, and
assuming you are all satisfy these criteria :
1. You can listen to music at work.
2. You have a persistent connection at home.
3. Your connection allows you to run incoming services.
4. You own a Mac.
I think you can afford an iPod to carry your bleeding tunes
to work. Honestly, If you can figure out how to update your
DHCP and run things on high ports so your ISP can't filter,
I think you ought to be able to get your self an iPod, or some kind of
portable storage to bring along to work. Why make it hard?
Re:simple solution (Score:3, Interesting)
And about how fast do you think someone will whip up a software ARP proxy? I'm guessing oh... 12 hours?
Re:And so it begins (Score:3, Interesting)
The amount of sharing going on on the net does not equal the drop off in record sales. The simple fact of the matter is that what is being produced today is not wanted (dare I say it sucks?), as much as they would like to shove it down our throats. Just because a record is released doesn't mean it should automatically make money (particularly if it sucks).
I urge anyone reading this to boycott the major record labels, and conversely start donating small amounts to independent OPEN SOURCE record labels - LIKE THIS ONE [opsound.org]
If you are involved in music just to make money, then you are in it for the wrong reasons. Do us all a favor, and become a used car salesman...
Re:simple solution (Score:4, Interesting)
But based on your description of what would happen, it sounds like I just created a new peer-to-peer network instead
Has Apple changed its Tune? (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course as soon as you choose to make allies in the music industry, you are going to have to negotiate, but one of the primary issues (mentioned so many times on slashdot that there is no point in providing links) is the question of whether we should have our liberty constrained in order to prevent us from breaking the law.
We would love to say 'No!', but then watch how many of us flaunt copyright law as a standard practice.
But also Apple was right - copyright protection is an unending waste of human resource, computer resource, comms resource, and slashdot posts!
Again and again we find that the music/video/text/etc. copyright and patent laws are incompatible with the Internet as a technology, and the Internet is not going to go away. Sorry, lawmakers, but one day soon you will have to wake up to the revolution that came from a direction you didn't expect, and then we will stop having to put kludges on top of kludges to deal with the cultural soup that we are in.
Creative minds will find a way of being able to provide a direct passage to it's audience. The huge publishing corporates are hanging onto a dying game. Monolithic software corporations are being replaced by interoperability standards.
Apple, Listen! Remember! Think different!
wow, apple could rake it in! (Score:3, Interesting)