Apple Shuns DRM Efforts So Far 628
Graff writes "This was found on SiliconValley.com. In an article for the Mercury News, Dan Gillmor talks about how Apple is still standing firm against the Digital Rights Management (DRM) efforts which the entertainment industry is trying to force on the public. There's also another article on the fight for our digital rights in Congress."
Apple knows which side their bread is buttered on (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple knows that as the little guy they have to actually make their users happy. DRM doesn't make for happy users, but "Rip, Mix, Burn" commercials do.
Re:Apple knows which side their bread is buttered (Score:2, Insightful)
I am SURE other MP3/Ogg player manus are REALLy thrilled about DRM.
This is bigger than MP3's on iPod (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple is setting themselves up as the computer to own if you want to work with multimedia, and installing DRM (which restricts fair use on a host of multimedia types) gets in the way of that vision.
Re:This is bigger than MP3's on iPod (Score:5, Informative)
If you read the article, you would notice that the OS cheerfully lets you rip, image, and mount whole DVD's to your hard drive, so you can watch them on battery power without the added electrical drain of the disk player.
Not quite true. If you just copy the DVD by drag-and-drop, you'll probably have playback problems. (CSS and the disc name disagreeing?) Image the thing with Disk Copy and you should be fine.
Alternatively, use a program like DVD Backup [wormintheapple.gr] to rip, DeCSS, de-region, and you're golden. Apple's DVD player will play it back just fine.
Apple actually enabled this feature (in the last six months or so) so that their DVD Player app could play back DVDs that had just been created with their DVD Studio Pro package: pre-imaging, pre-burn, just sitting there loose on the hard drive. Apple is trying to make things easier for content creators, their traditional market, and a handy side-effect for everyone else is a non-DRM solution on the table.
Re:This is bigger than MP3's on iPod (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This is bigger than MP3's on iPod (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Apple knows which side their bread is buttered (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple's real business is selling Macs, the iPod is simply a Mac accessory. They hope that cool toys like the iPod will sell more Macs. Of course, they make some money on the iPod itself, but not compared to selling computers. If DRM was good for their computer business they would dump the iPod faster than you could say "Newton."
They want people to see the Mac as the platform for folks who are making their own cool mix CDs, and that are making their own movies. DRM would put kinks in these kinds of uses, and so Apple opposes DRM. Besides, they have seen the writing on the wall, a lot of people actually like getting on Kazaa (or whatever, I have never really gotten into P2P) and sharing music, videos, and other assorted files. For many people that is their primary reason for owning a computer. The last thing Apple wants is to be cut off from this market.
Economics applies... (Score:5, Insightful)
The margins on the iPod are likely much higher than the ones on the PC because you can get away with higher margins at lower prices. A lot of people see a candy bar for a dollar and will pay for it, even if the candy bar takes 5 or 10 cents to make. That's a 100-200% markup. Most retail stores need a 50% markup over costs of merchandise to cover expenses of staff and make a nice profit as well (after all, if you're not turning a profit, you are going out of business soon).
The iPod has some plastic, a few chips, software, and a laptop HD. Total cost to Apple is probably 40 to 60% of the price of the device at the store because of their volume purchasing power. The store takes in maybe 10% of the price, the rest is divided between Apple and the company that ships things to stores.
Ever notice how the 10gb and 20gb models are only a little bit apart (compared to the 5gb and 10gb models)? That's because they could probably sell the 20gb model for very close to the price (if not the same price as) the 10gb model and still make a profit similar to that of the 5gb model. The extra cost to them of making it a 20gb drive instead of a 10gb drive is small enough that they want to make it look more attractive to buy the 20gb version, because they make ~99% of the price difference between it and the 10gb model straight into their pockets. That's why FastFood places will "supersize" meals as well -- an extra 5-10 cents of cola and fries to gain an extra 60 cents of money is a very smart thing to do if you want more in your margins.
What about computers? Computers aren't as simple, and the parts cost more overall. Most places have very, very slim margins and rely on economies of scale to give them a healthy profit margin. That is how Dell is so succesful(their margin is larger because you pay it all to them, with no $$ going to the stores or other middlemen). That's why VA systems got out of the computer hardware business --- teeny, tiny margins, even on server hardware. That's why Compaq and HP merged (slimmer margins mean more must be shipped). That is also why white-box computers flourish (speciality shops charge more, but give more in terms of selection and control). Electronics Boutique charges more than Wal-mart on games, but they have a much wider selection, and they will buy back used games (as well as sell used goods).
So keep in mind that the iPod is a very smart move for Apple, not just a Mac accessory designed to push their computers. Just because something costs more, doesn't mean they're making more.
Re:Apple knows which side their bread is buttered (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Apple knows which side their bread is buttered (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Apple knows which side their bread is buttered (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Apple knows which side their bread is buttered (Score:3, Funny)
"Can I keep him?"
"I don't know, he looks pretty hungry. Here, give him some booze."
MS's reasons are far from altruistic (Score:5, Insightful)
Why?
Simple, standards. If the government says how DRM will work then everyone will be able to write to that and have DRM. If MS gets to make their own DRM system they'll be able to ensure that only the companies they want can play along.
Re:Apple knows which side their bread is buttered (Score:2)
All kinds of forces (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, though, the notion that Palladium is okay because you're not forced into booting into it is a joke. Microsoft built a billion-dollar industry by understanding that there are many kinds of forces, and some of the most powerful are market forces.
Once a large installed TCPA compliant processor base exists, you're going to find yourself forced into booting into Palladium mode because you won't be able to access the content you need without it. Your boss will send you e-mail, for instance, which will only be able to be read in Palladium mode. So you'll have to boot into it. Microsoft knows this. Microsoft is counting on it.
That's why it's so important that we refuse to upgrade to TCPA chips. We know from the DivX debacle that consumers have the ability to reject bad choices. We need to draw the same kind of line in the sand with TCPA chips. If AMD and Intel take a massive economic hit on the Trusted Computing architecture, they'll reject it. My fear is that a shallow understanding of the Palladium future by consumers + naive, buzzword-driven purchasing by PHBs will enable Trusted Computing to establish a market foothold. The battle lines are being drawn and I think we have a lot of work to do.
I'm hoping for some of that Intel lovin' (Score:3, Insightful)
that, my friend, is what i am hoping for with microsoft. we all know that palladium will be released regardless of what happens, but if we make enough impact for it to boot into the "insecure mode" (without too much bitching and whining) by default, we can have a good chance of killing it. all it needs is really some (okay, a lot of) bad publicity. the thing that did the intel trick was the "privacy" deal (even though, actually, it wasn't so much a big deal) -- being that Palladium has the potential to do THAT much harm, it makes you wonder why no newspaper has did any kind of real columns on it...
oh wait... you don't mean the newspaper (media) is ultimately the same group of people as the RIAA / MPAA (content providers)? outlook not so good, eh?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:All kinds of forces (Score:5, Informative)
Re:All kinds of forces (Score:3, Interesting)
I for one am really looking forward to having a palladium infrastructure in place.
1) I wont buy shitty music regardless of how its encumbered, so that doesn't effect me.
2) DVDs are encumbered now, but i can do whatever i want to with them (watch them). There are black-market players that are available to me that let me skip commercials, undo region coding, etc, but as much as i dislike those attributes, i haven't voted with my dollars (yet)
3) If someone like microsoft (or apple, or sun, or any other technology company) outlines how DRM et al should work, that means record companies and legislators _ARENT_ doing it. When was the last time you ran across a good government standard ? When was the last time you saw a peice of software by a media company that was worth using ?
4) I really like the idea of being able to put a usage policy on content. For instance, if i scan some pictures of a vacation, and put them on a website, perhaps i want to apply a policy that says these can only be viewed by people that have access the picture from the URL. Then i can simply restrict access to the site via the normal means, and the pictures will not be redistributable once they've been downloaded by the viewers that I do allow.
you think this is stupid, and maybe it is. On the other hand, a picture taken of my wife and a friend of ours (totally clean, of course) from a party we went to ended up on a "hot teen of the day" site. Asking the site adminstrator to take the pciture down of course was a pain. And i was lucky that they complied.
If there had been some sort of DRM policy on JPEGs then i wouldn't have to be upset with the friend that posted the pictures on his site for not restricting access. I wouldn't have to flinch everytime i see a camera to think "where the fuck is this going to end up, maybe with a few photoshop edits"
The MS work behind TCPA/Palladium is not as orweillian as you think. It is not a framework designed to let hollywood hold all the strings (nor is it setup to let MS hold all the strings).
TCPA / Palladium do not add any restrictions. They allow new types of things to be done that cannot currently be done (sending an email that cannot be forwarded, distributing an image that cannot be edited, etc)
If media companies stop distributing media in clear-text, thats their choice. Vote with your dollars. If, despite rational arguments to the contrary, you cannot stand the idea of TCPA, you'll be able to vote with your dollars there, as well.
Second verse, same as the first . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple is very sensitive to both its own copyrights and such, remember the recycle/trash bin discussion and the lawsuits of the 1980s, but Apple was started by hardware freaks, and not software freaks. Steve knows the work-arounds are too easy, that's why Apple never really bothered with copy protected software in the first place.
Bill Gates is focused on software, and since the mid 1970s he has been obsessed with preventing programmers, uh, oops, consumers from copying his programs bootleg style.
This is a very old difference between these two camps. DVDs, CDs, digital media, whatever, for Steve it's all the same. Hardware has a much greater profit margin, and he wants to sell primarily hardware. See how much of the current i-Suite is bundled or downloadable free of charge?
It's to drive the sales of hardware units.
Sony and BMG have their own problems. BMG bought Napster to try to outrun this problem. But it's not Steve's problem.
Even for his Pixar films, he controls the rights to the lucrative movie theatre sales. Again, to really see a movie, you have to have a large screen and a popcorn machine. Bill doesn't work that angle, Steve does. Steve makes his money without worrying if some kid is going to copy his digital wares, because he has already turned his profits.
Let's not see Steve as an altruist, but simply someone who knows how to pick profitable models, that don't require unnatural market protections.
Remember, DRM is not only a pain in the @$$, but they will also have to raise taxes to reinforce it with police and the courts. FUN. ;-(
Yeah Duh (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Yeah Duh (Score:2, Funny)
God is the only form of extraterrestrial life that we will ever be able to communicate with. SETI is a joke people.
You can communicate with God? I thought it was "upload only" with him/her/it.
I'd image they would. (Score:3, Interesting)
Steve knows.
Re:I'd image they would. (Score:5, Informative)
In fact, the "don't steal music" sticker that comes on every iPod is probably the most effective anti-piracy measure you can take.
You can expect to see this in the forthcoming version of iTunes that will let you share your MP3s with other people on your network. Apple has announced that it will only stream MP3s, and not copy them. As soon as the source server goes offline, so does the music.
Apple does not want to incur the wrath of the RIAA, but they want to keep their users happy too. So they make their software so that it is easy to do the things that are definitely legal, but they don't put any roadblocks in the way of you doing anything that might be illegal and then leave it up to you to decide which is which.
Re:I'd image they would. (Score:3, Funny)
And I wish others would learn from it, especially the RIAA.
Dont' they realize they extreme effect they might have on technology as a whole, forever? Even if the crazy DRM/Palladium/whatever is only implemented for a short time, in an extreme situation it could kill Linux, amature software development, amature music, etc... and sometimes the latest, most innovative thing comes from just such a source.
RIAA: "Ehh, they'll never know what they missed anyways. Look, on TV, it's the new Brittney video! She shows a nipple, we're gonna make trillions!"
Microsoft: "Hey I got food on my face, hand me another $100, will ya?"
MPAA: *comes in* "Check it out! 'Dude I STILL Can't Find My Car' on MSVD!!!"
Microsoft: "Hahaha, what did that cost you a whole $50 to make?"
MPAA: "Yea, well after the 'extra cost' of having to put all that DRM on it, we still marked it up to $40 a copy!"
All in unison: "MUAHAHAHAHAHA" *all the way to bank*
That settles it (Score:5, Funny)
I'm sick and tired of the rest of the PC world bending over for psycho-bitch Hillary Rosen and her storm troopers at the RIAA, and I'm glad that Apple is giving the finger to Jack Valenti, a decrepit old combed-over hack that wouldn't know a dying business model if it crawled up his leg and bit him in the balls.
Keep it up, Apple. You'll be getting my business from now on. Like-minded Slashdotters might consider doing the same. (It's not as if most of us are particularly dependent on the availability of Microsoft Windows-only apps anyway! And OS X is just tres cool.)
RIAA is now suing radio stations (Score:3, Funny)
I'm reading the article right now on a highly reputable online newspaper [theonion.com]. Stupid RIAA.
Re:That settles it (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:That settles it (Score:4, Insightful)
Are games more important then rights?
I have been playing games on consols and computers since pong. I like games, they bring me hours of entertainment.
If DRM becomes prevalient, I will by a MAC, even if it means never playing a game again. That said, once the market begins to increase, there will be games, its just a matter of time.
Re:That settles it (Score:2)
Seriously though - DRM seems like a pretty silly reason to change platforms. It'll never take off, if it does it'll never be as bad as people make it out to be, and even if it does happen there will be ways around it. The kind of people affected most by DRM don't have a problem breaking the law anyway, so why should DRM be another problem?
new switch ads... (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, though, that's the best argument I've heard so far to buy a Mac.
Re:new switch ads... (Score:2, Insightful)
Relying on Apple is foolish. They'll cave or become even more irrelevant. Fighting DRM across the board is a far better option.
Re:new switch ads... (Score:3, Insightful)
not being able to play CDs (and remember, this is only new, popular, DRM CDs) in my computer is not realy that big of a deal. Not being able to burn CD's is.
Re:new switch ads... (Score:3, Insightful)
implement strong (Palladium- or TCPA-style) DRM.
It requires support in application software,
operating system, firmware, motherboard, keyboard,
video card, monitor, and sound card, and I might
have missed something.
I can't wait! (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, I know about the "guest appearances" of SGI in "Twister" and others, but this may lead to more "reality" in my action movies. Like using a Cpmpaq to upload a virus to aliens
Surprised (Score:2)
Missing the point (Score:2, Interesting)
is coming -- it's too useful not to catch on.
The question is not will we be able to resist
DRM, but rather, who will be empowered by it?
With the right laws, the answer could be "the
public". It will be hard to get the right laws,
given the evil influences of Microsoft and the
entertainment industry, but it's not a physical
or moral impossibility.
Re:Missing the point (Score:2, Interesting)
Once you have LAWS to enforce what should be a MORAL issue, you remove all chance for morality to blossom there. All moral discussion is replaced by a discussion of the letter of the law.
Discussions on morality can be had by everyone. Discussions on the letter of the law can only be had effectively by lawyers. Who has more/better/costlier lawyers, Hollywood or me?
Now tell me how codifying rights management in the law books would work out in my/the public's best interests.
Re:Missing the point (Score:5, Insightful)
define useful. Draconian? opressive? interfering? sure...those are "useful" to a small handful of people. But to the masses it makes something utilitarian become considerably more difficult to do anything with.
The question is not will we be able to resist DRM, but rather, who will be empowered by it? With the right laws, the answer could be "the public". It will be hard to get the right laws, given the evil influences of Microsoft and the entertainment industry, but it's not a physical or moral impossibility.
That's where you're even more wrong. Resisting the use of DRM is important. Your comments remind me of the people who are just accepting any restrictions of fredom and "guilty until proven innocent" legislation or motion made since 91101. What we need is a serious revamp of copyright laws to expand fair use and decrease the time of copyrights. Joe Musician creates music in his computer these days or his garage and can make his own music to distribute easily. Therefore, pandering to the music industry, for example, and begging for their table scraps is stupid when there are lots of bands out there who are as good or better who just don't get airplay. Your defeatist attitude towards the future of freedom from DRM systems is not helping.
Re:Missing the point (Score:3, Interesting)
What we need is a serious revamp of copyright laws to expand fair use and decrease the time of copyrights.
And the easiest way to get that is to provide technical barriers to replace the legal ones. Technical barriers like... DRM.
Joe Musician creates music in his computer these days or his garage and can make his own music to distribute easily.
But he can't make money off that music because distribution over the internet is not profitable. So instead the big names with the big marketing budgets and the ability to cut CDs and more importantly to distribute those CDs make it and the little guy loses. DRM has the ability to change this. Instead of needing to beg the RIAA to get you on a radio station you can release time-limited copies of your music over the internet. With DRM there will be many more artists willing to allow streaming digital audio transmissions. Just take a look at Rhapsody [listen.com]. That's DRM, and if it had enough people willing to use it I think it'd be a positive thing.
Re:Digital wRongs Management? (Score:2)
On the other hand, I don't want DRM on my main PC. I should be allowed to archive all my CD's to mp3 (and later, DVD to mpeg-4) on the biggest hard drive I can find and share it all with every other computer in the house. This is perfectly legal under the "personal use" clause of the license agreements, but if DRM had its way even this wouldn't be allowed.
DRM is not a person. DRM does not stop you from archiving your CDs to mp3. DRM is not a law. DRM merely allows companies to protect technologically that which they can already protect legally. That's a good thing, because it encourages people to release content in formats they otherwise would be forced to avoid.
Re:Digital wRongs Management? (Score:3, Informative)
FUD if i ever saw it. DRM makes it a pain in the ass to archive your CDs to MP3 and to play them on other boxes, and to reinstall your OS, and oh yeah...it also makes it a pain in the ass to run what you want to. It also makes it pointless because I don't want a vapor copy of something that I could have hardcopy of. Why would I purchase an MP3 or MPEG4 when I could just buy a DVD or CD and then make it myself, making it less suceptible to loss? DRM is nothing more than a system of control that they want to implement to make it a pain in the ass to use your fair use. you can't resell a digital file of a song, but you can resell a CD. It's pure marketing evil. Look beyond the surface...theres a lot more to it than just protecting their works
I can't wait... (Score:5, Funny)
A serious question (Score:2, Interesting)
If (for example) Microsoft's DRM software makes it impossible to play MP3's on it's Media Player, wouldn't it just be a simple matter of using a different MP3 player? Is the concern here that somehow it will be illegal to use "a different MP3 player"?
I'm curious to know what the specific concerns of people who are against DRM have. As far as I understand, DRM only affects the people who choose to use DRM-enabled products.
What do you expect? (Score:2, Insightful)
I dont personally like DRM in the way that they propose it. But, it's all ok now because of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act.
Conversely (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What do you expect? (Score:2)
It is my experience most Mac users use a mac as a tool in there craft.
This guy's got it right... (Score:4, Insightful)
Finally, someone who understands and uses the appropriate name for this monstrosity.
Open Letter to any apple employees: (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm writing this message to applaud your stand against the ironically named Digital Rights Management efforts of the MPAA and RIAA. I was wavering on my next computer purchase, trying to decide between building my own system and purchasing an Apple computer. Because of your stand, you have won both my current purchase and my loyalty. I have many acquaintances who depend on me for computer advice, and I will be sending them your way. Regardless of your motives for doing this, I shall not forget your defense of basic consumer rights any time soon.
Respectfully,
A Future loyal customer.
Re:Open Letter to any apple employees: (Score:5, Informative)
Please, PLEASE send this to Apple's feedback site. I'll give you some quick links:
This is the type of stuff that Apple needs to hear! Please, if you (or anyone else reading this thread) want to express your support for Apple, even if you don't currently have the werewithal to purchase an Apple product, contact them via the methods they've provided.
Both positive and negative comments are appreciated, I'm sure - after all, Apple does want to know your opinions.
FYI - I do not work for Apple in any way shape or form - I just think, like many others, that they're doing the right thing (and I've already given them my money).
Email them and tell them (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple's marketting people may not know what DRM is, but they'll know that not supporting it is a good thing in the eyes of a lot of customers. Telling them you're a convert will also add more to it as it will say, "I took the plunge." That is what they want/need to hear. Converts are far more likely to get more people to convert than existing users. If they alienate their converts and they go back over to say... RedHat on Opteron (later on) then they've just shot themselves in the foot and Apple doesn't want that.
We Shall See (Score:5, Insightful)
One of these two things will happen:
Re:We Shall See (Score:2)
That said, Apple is doing the right thing, and I applaud them for it.
Tried buying mainstream vinyl these days? (Score:4, Interesting)
The day CD-DA disappears because "everyone" has magically switched to Windows Media, I will eat my hat.
Sure, I mean this isn't the industry that forced us all to transition to LP's from 78's, or that convinced us to rebuy all our music on cassette after that, and then 20 years ago convinced us all to upgrade all our music to CD again. Is it?
Tried getting hold of any mainstream music on vinyl recently? Even cassettes are pretty hard to find now, and the sound and cassette assembly quality of pre-recorded cassettes is at an all-time low. Of course, you probably don't notice this, because chances are, you buy everything on CD.
The content industry has proved at least 3 times that it knows exactly how to get us all to upgrade our media formats, whether we like it or not: the transition from LP to cassette was in all sorts of ways a step backwards, but it still happened. Cassettes didn't last too long in the mainstream either, because they allowed you to record. The content providers pushed for a more desirable format, and up popped CD, which you could only copy to analogue cassette for the first 15 years of its life or so, significantly downgrading the quality.
Today we face a situation fairly similar to how things were in 1981 or thereabouts: a recordable, fairly open format (Then: cassette, Now: MP3/Ogg) is going mainstream, and is slowly killing off an older, more cumbersome, more expensive but arguably better-sounding format (Then: LP, Now: CD). The content industry is unhappy about this, because they feel that the recordability/copyability of the newer format is going to affect their bottom line. So they lobby for new laws in the US (Then: 1976 Copyright Act, Now: 1998 DMCA) to give them some legal standing, and to enable them to clamp down on those encouraging copying, and then they push for a new, virtually uncopyable format (Then: CD, Now: Windows Media/Palladium) with their technology partners (Then: Sony/Philips, Now: Microsoft/Intel/AMD). The new format has benefits for the consumer (Then: better sound quality and robustness, Now: no more trudging round music shops - entire catalogues available for easy download, all with pristine encoding and no blatant P2P spyware/stealware included).
The parallels are stark, and it only took 10 years for CD to dominate and for other formats to start dying, niche markets aside. If the content industry and Microsoft gets the marketing right, I fully expect exactly the same to happen with WM/Palladium - it will come to dominate in 10 years and CD will die.
The situation isn't entirely identical - the evolution of digital technology has made the stakes higher for both content provider (free P2P distribution is their worst nightmare) and consumer (breaking strong encryption on trusted systems seems a lot harder than simply waiting for recordable CD technology to become available and affordable). So you can expect much more of a battle than was the case with CDs. Nonetheless, I still expect the content industry to win this one - they are the ones with all the strings to pull. We don't have to let them walk all over us though - if we make noise now, we should be able to at least get some concessions towards fair use. If we shout loud enough, there is still the outside possibility that we can kill it dead.
However, if you simply sit tight and see what happens, maybe buying a Mac rather than a PC in a token gesture, then I hope you've got lube and an unwanted hat (not a red fedora by any chance?) because you'll be bending right over for the content industry and you'd better be hungry.
Re:Tried buying mainstream vinyl these days? (Score:3, Interesting)
Nobody forced anything. The industry marketed well, and consumers decided time and time again to purchase the newly hyped technology and format, almost always for ease of use.
Nobody ever came to my house and forced me to start buying cassettes instead of 8 tracks, or 33s instead of 78s. I don't recall any "format army" removing my tape decks and installing CD players.
Tapes were lower sound quality than vinyl, but portable and more durable. Convenience won out over quality.
CDs, are another step in convenience: more music(ignoring the flaky 90m and 120m cassetes) in a smaller package and instant access to any portion of the content. Sound quality is arguably about the same as good vinyl and cassette(with DNR).
DVDs offer extra content, better image and sound quality, and instant access to any portion of the content. Consumers are now starting to catch on to that and VHS content is begining to wane.
If at any of those transitions the public had, on the whole, simply decided to keep purchasing the old formats, the new stuff would have langished and died, or both formats would have endured for a long time. Arguably, the latter is quite the case for the most recent transitions. Most recordings are still available on cassette. Cassette players are still readily available and come standard in most systems. VHS still dominates the shelves and we're what, 6 years in to DVD lifetime?
But there are some failed conversions: Laser video disks (quality was outweighed by the inconvenience of flipping a disk in the middle of a movie) people stayed with VHS. Betamax: better technology (arguably), bad political moves: VHS came out on top. DAT: Smaller media size outweighed by wind/rewind delays: people stayed with CDs. In each case the consumers as a whole decided that the newly offered technology, though perhaps technically superior, was not easier to use and did not purchase it. I ignore cost as a barrier to adoption because all new technology is expensive initially.
If DRM offers the consumer some 'next step' in convenience that is preferable, then it will catch on and become the norm. Trying to make consumers believe the content provider's goal of "our content our way, or no way" is easier or better for the consumer will be a long, hard sell at best. Their best bet to get adoption is to play the cost game. Make the content in DRM format low cost and raise the cost for non-DRM version. Ex: Same album: DRM version $10, non-DRM version: $25.
Re:We Shall See (Score:2)
"The entertainment industry has pushed laws through congress, that restrict your rights, because Apple will always defend your rights, the cd will not play in the mac. We suggets you look for an import version your cd at www.nondrmentertainment.com.
Click here to send your congressman a fax to show your disapproval of the DRM law."
Re:We Shall See (Score:3, Insightful)
Obligatory Beastie Boys reference (Score:5, Funny)
You gotta fight... for our digital rights... in Connnnnn-gress!
TheFrood
No apology necessary (Score:2)
Well, no, because "for digital rights" is still five syllables, whereas "for your right" is only three. Also, I was trying to stay as close to the quote in the article as possible. It's a tradeoff either way, but I didn't think there was enough to be gained by tossing out the "our". Appreciate the feedback, though.
TheFrood
It all boils down to... (Score:5, Insightful)
Intel, AMD, and Microsoft basically believe that we are untrustworthy until proven trustworthy. Even when we prove it, it's only for that exchange.
Apple believes their customers are trustworthy.
Which company would you rather do business with?
Mox
Re:It all boils down to... (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple doesn't even bother with keys for Jaguar. Regardless of their motives, I perceive this to be a certain level of trust. I rewarded them for it by purchasing 10.2 instead of grabbing one of many copies online.
Re:It all boils down to... (Score:3, Insightful)
easy to digitally duplicate a $2000 piece of
hardware.
Re:It all boils down to... (Score:2)
Well, the veracity of that statement notwithstanding, it seems to me that certain segments of the market-- kids, I suppose-- have very definitely proven themselves to be untrustworthy. In the years since Napster made "MP3" a more popular search term than "sex" on the Internet, it seems pretty clear that, for a notable segment of the population at least, piracy is where it's at.
I'm not saying the proponents of DRM are universally right, but it's clear that they're not universally wrong, either.
Re:It all boils down to... (Score:5, Insightful)
Imagine this kind of thinking in other industries:
- Airlines handcuff you to your seat, unless you can prove that you've gone through some rigid (and expensive) background investigation.
- Retail stores escort you around the store while you do your shopping, and frisk you on your way out.
- The state requires you to submit to a breathalizer test every time you get behind the wheel of your car.
Society is based to a large degree on trust. Everytime you leave your house, you trust the police to keep you safe. You trust your employer to make the right decisions to keep you employed. You trust your babysitter not to murder your children while you're out taking in dinner and a movie.
Sometimes this trust is broken. Yet we, as a society, continue to thrive under a model of trust. This seems to work, for the most part. Why change it so drastically?
Mox
Guess I made the right decision (Score:2)
Sitting on my desk next to the computer I'm on(my company Dell laptop) is a brand new PowerBook. Impulse buy, really... one I can't really afford, but oh well.
This is just another confirmation that I made the right decision. And heck, more and more games are coming out for Mac, too! I should have waited a few weeks, though, when they are planning on upgrading their models. Everyone else should take note of that.
Looking at the prices, they aren't as bad as I had thought. The features on the PowerBook I got are expensive on PC laptops, too. You get what you pay for.
The only bad thing is Apple's tendency to try to lock you in. They're open about many things, but they can be bad about pushing their own bundled applications. On the other hand, they don't purposefully break things(with the exception of Dock extensions, which is an annoyance) or try to STOP you from running your choice of software.
I need to try this (Score:5, Informative)
DRM? No thanks. (Score:4, Interesting)
"Step 1: Insert CD
Step 2: Click import
Step 3: There is no step 3..."
Like I said in one of the previous articles, I think that the only way Apple would include DRM is if they become legally required to, or are forced into a situation by the entertainment industry that could cut Apple's users out of the picture...that is if they were to only release material in a DRM approved format. Now I know that there would be computer saavy folk who can work around the DRM, but Apple's average user won't. (heh, unless that simply requires a magic marker)
Regards,
Sean
Re:DRM? No thanks. (Score:2)
Should DRM become so bad that users can't do some of the most basic actions that would fall under fair use, I really think Apple would be missing a major opportunity if they did not start advertising their lack of DRM. As long as Joe Average knows that not every platform restricts you in such a way, there will be a strong temptation to switch.
Whether or not Apple supports DRM is irrelevant. What matters is whether or not the artists support it, and more importantly, whether or not the artists support alternatives to it.
And I think your insight that people will switch to media which allows fair use is an important part of that equation. If musicians switch to media which takes away the ability to do things they want to do, people will switch to other musicians.
Remember, DRM is just a technology. To abuse the gun slogan: DRM doesn't take away fair use. People take away fair use.
Steve Jobs is for fair use (Score:5, Informative)
Yay for corporations! (Score:3, Insightful)
Before we all have to endure the ensuing "Apple cares about us!" and "Yay for Apple!" posts, just remember that Apple does not equal freedom. Free, open source software does.
Apple, Inc. does not care about you or I, in fact, no ones gives a shit about you or I, so take control yourself by using, developing for, and advancing Linux. If you don't like having others make your choices, start making your own.
Re:Yay for corporations! (Score:2)
Damn right. (Score:2)
Further examples of Apple corporate Schizophrenia (Score:5, Interesting)
The next they're hated for keeping Aqua closed.
A week later, they're lauded once again for making development tools free.
Then they're hated for pushing specific look and feel.
They're loved again for ignoring DRM pressure.
But only a day before, they're scoffed at for keeping people out of the GUI cusstomization business.
And to top it all off, they're even disliked for having a monopoly in their own segment.
Either Apple doesn't know what one hand is doing while the other isn't looking, or we're a bunch of really fickle damn people. With me, it's come down to a comparison between Apple, Microsoft and Linux on the areas of usability, who has whose best interests in mind, and price.
Apple is by far the most usable. Bar none. Linux may have more uses, and Microsoft owns the market. But neither Linux or Microsoft actually seem to develop intuitive interfaces and software that Just Works.
Apple is only slightly more expensive than a comparable PC. Your typical linux box is kludged together from parts and duct tape, or built significantly cheaper from new parts. Linux wins this hands down, but is it enough?
But the real key is the question of who has whose best interests in mind. There's no debating the fact that Bill Gates wants your first born. MS EULAs are so easy to find fault with that it's become a hobby here. Microsoft wants to control your computer and accepts no responsibility when things break. Linux is all about freedom, your software, your gear, your control. Great in theory, but things just -break- on Linux as soon as you start installing post-distribution software unless IT is your life. Great for professional IT guys, but Linux seems to continue failing to make mom and dad comfortable.
Steve Jobs on the other hand, is a very odd type. He wants things his way, but he's utterly convinced it's' because it's better for everyone else. And oddly enough, he's usually not too far off. Apple makes their entire reputation based on making the system something anyone can get into and take the reins of. With XServe, they're on track to some badly needed credibility in the IT segment. They might be a scary monopolistic bunch in some pretty noticable ways, but despite it, they've got the best system for anyone.
I wish I were of enough stature to suggest a truce. I'd suggest this. Apple should open up the interface for a bit more customization, expose the API's and maybe work in some kind of X11/Aqua hybrid feature so X11 applications can run on Aqua without extensive modification to the Aqua look and feel. In exchange for this, Open Source advocates can shut up about how Apple isn't entirely Open Source, and accept the fact that Apple's survival counts on them having the exclusive control of their own interface.
Sound fair?
Re:Further examples of Apple corporate Schizophren (Score:2)
I'm with the latter. It' amazing. This thread, because it's vaguely pro-freedom (or pro-stealing) will have roughly 200 "Apple rules, I wish it ran on Intel, I'd buy OS X today" people. Yesterday's thread, because, despite being a giant non-issue, seemed to be about controlling people or limiting something, resulted in 500 "Apple sucks, they're just another monopoly. Kill them and bury them next to M$" posts.
Fickle fickle fickle. You know how it works? You pick a side and cast your lot with it. I picked Linux a few years ago, saw what I was missing, and returned to the Apple fold. Either make up your mind and commit or just stop bitching. That's how I see it. If you like Linux, do your best to make it better and promote it. Why do you care what Apple does? If you like Macs, say "ha, I don't have to worry about dumb MS licensing and crap" and be happy making iMovies and burning DVDs. That's really all there is to it.
Re:Further examples of Apple corporate Schizophren (Score:2)
Re:Further examples of Apple corporate Schizophren (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm a big PC fan and I love Linux. This post made me really think and actually consider buying an Apple. What I want to see is options. When I can customize my desktop to the extent I can with GNOME, I'll start recommending it to folks. However, I'll still probably use Linux for 1) Game compatibility and 2) price.
I agree that Linux doesn't "just work", it does work most of the time. I put RH 7.3 with Ximian GNOME on a box and everything just works for me. No issues with word docs, no issues getting my browser and email to integrate with other apps... etc. I've got my parents and a family friend on Linux, and none of these people are "computer literate." I think the only thing they really need right now is easier installation and management of programs and files and more interoperation.
One of the things that gets me is that some folks arrogantly say Linux is so hard to use, but in fact they haven't touched it past a two year old version of Slackware or they only use Debian. Linux has been moving very fast in the past few years and it's starting to speed up even more. Ximian has been out for a while, I like it and I think it works well. A lot of people are collaborating well on interoperability and things are changing. Linux moves faster than proprietary stuff, so it's a fallacy to base your views of it without having used the stuff that's come out in the last 6 months.
As for Apple, I think the Slashdot readership is just that -- a group of readers. A bunch of different people. You can't call slashdotters fickle when there are overwhelming differences in opinion one day to the next -- some folks are just being quiet, some folks are speaking up and some folks are just expressing their views regarding individual issues with Apple separately.
As for my opinion, I say that Apple should move more towards OSS and prove that it's possible. Not all of their money is based on software, although I'll admit I have no figures. I would be behind them all the way, but they have the mantra that "What's good for Apple is good for you."
Default options are wonderful if you don't want to research configurations. But locking configs down is ridiculous, IMO.
Re:Further examples of Apple corporate Schizophren (Score:5, Informative)
Just because Apple doesn't actively support altering of Aqua doesn't mean you can't, or for that matter, that it's not allowed.
Duality [conundrumsoft.com]Apple has pursued those who create an Aqua style theme for other computers because the LOOK and FEEL does belong to them. They paid artists and graphic designers to come up with it. Using it elsewhere is like using the Apple logo elsewhere, and Apple has the right to keep what's theirs theirs.
X11 already runs on Mac OS X, in the same screen space as Aqua (if your turn the option on), and personally I feel as though it's a Good Thing(TM) to have X11 not look like Aqua. After all, it ISN'T Aqua and thus I am made aware of the enviromental differences simply by observing what kind of window it is. If I'm the type of person who can't handle that, why am I running X11 in the first place?
XDarwin [xdarwin.org]If you're talking about doing screen drawing, Aqua is meerly the look and feel (interface philosophy, if you will), it doesn't HAVE an API. You may be thinking of Quartz, QuickDraw, and QuickTime, which are pretty [apple.com] extensively [apple.com] documented [apple.com], as they always have been. For free, too. If you're intrested in what Aqua actually is, read the Aqua Human Interface Guidelines [apple.com].
As for Aqua, anything you need to do to make Aqua windows/widgets when coding are there. Check out the Window Manger [apple.com] documentation, or the Cocoa flavor [apple.com], if you liek that sort of thing ;-)
There are no "hidden APIs" (unlike M$ Windoze). There are however, system internal functions for performing tasks that need to be done (Window widgets, double buffering, etc), for which there is no need of programmer intervention.
Claiming those functions are a "hidden API" is like being pissed you can't call functions in a library because they where only implemented to assist the programmers while writing the library. In fact, that's exactly the same thing, isn't it? Hmmmmmm.....
This is one of the ways Apple is achieving greater system stability, through abstraction of the OS and hardware to the programmer. MacOS 9 (er..."Classic") was hacked to shreds by anyone and everyone, and there where all kinds of problems with INITs and CDEVs and such running amok on everyone's system. I have no less than 175 INITs and CDEVs on this machine right now (yes, a Classic box, 8600/250) and I use most of that functionality. The OS sometimes gets slow, sometimes crashes. A clean install of MacOS 9 will be damn quick and DAMN stable. Throw all this crazy hack-job business in the mix and it's easy to hose your whole system in no time. With Mac OS X, Apple has abstracted many things and it keeps programmers from being naughty and say, writing directly to WindowDef structures, which reside in system memory space. So should it be allowed? Imagine a loop with a bug which, under certian conditions, will write forever to that WindowPtr. Now remember it's in the system heap. Oops.
I can put it better with a quote from Super Troopers: "The less you knew, the less you could fuck up."Re:Further examples of Apple corporate Schizophren (Score:3)
As for Apple starting to bundle; while I support Fink Apple has started their own project called "Darwin ports" which is going to be like Fink except supported by Apple and thus "in the know" about future developments.
Don't delude yourselves. (Score:2, Insightful)
To everyone who thinks Apple is "sticking up for your rights" or some crap: Get a clue.
This is purely marketing - Apple doesn't "believe" in anything any more than any other company. Given the chance, Apple would introduce the "friendly fascism" of DRM just the same as Microsoft has been doing. The only difference is that Apple can't *afford* to alienate their users in this way, whereas Microsoft is able to piss off a lot more people at once and get away with it.
Don't drink the Apple kool aid and believe that they're doing anything with your rights in mind. Buy an Apple because you love Aqua, or because you like OS X's mainstream application support, but with the ability to whip open tcsh when you feel the need. But don't buy their stuff because you think they're doing your rights any good. If they do so, it's incidental, and precarious at best.
If you're interested in your rights, go install Debian and only use Vorbis for your music. Yeah, you don't get Aqua, but at least you can be true to yourself. ([plug]and in all, while not as pretty as Aqua, GNOME 2 is pretty damn nice, usability-wise[/plug]) Otherwise, get an OS X box and be happy, but be happy with it for honest reasons.
Re:Don't delude yourselves. (Score:3, Interesting)
I think this has more to do with Apple's strategic position than with currying favor with users per se, but I'm sure they would like to be seen as more user friendly than other computer manufacturers, and this does fit in with that.
It's obvious that corporations exist to make money, but if we are successfully voting with our dollars, we will encourage PC manufacturers to give us the kind of open hardware and software we want. Granted, Debian will always be more Free than Mac OS, but that doesn't mean we ignore a position that an important company is taking that supports our stance on user rights and freedoms.
Who cares? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, Apple is a business. The business isn't there to make us happy and protect our rights. However, it does happen to believe that doing these two things is in the company's best financial interests. So they are doing great things such as this shunning of the DRM. Why does it make a difference if Apple is doing this out of love for humanity or because it just makes sense? It doesn't change the fact that it is a Good Thing, and seems to be a trend with Apple these days.
It's just like with legislation. If our Congressmen voted against DRM, I wouldn't care if it was purely out of the desire for votes in their next election and didn't care a whit about actually helping people. So long as they are motivated to do the best thing for the people.
If you found out some major app or utility for Linux was made by a programmer who didn't give a crap about freedom or rights, but just wanted to have that app for free (read: motivated by money), would you discourage people from using it?
Wrong - Apple is what Jobs believes. (Score:4, Insightful)
Some companies are basically giant extensions of a leaders personality. I would argue Apple is such a company, as is MS, as is Oracle, and to a lesser extent, Sun.
Your argument that Microsoft can "afford" to do this so they do, is silly. Why would any company do something if they knew it would hurt them? MS does it because Bill Gates believes in this stuff, just as Apple thinks it's stupid so they don't.
Just think of it as a giant war fought with huge robots ala Anime, except that the robots are replaced by companies. That's exactly what we are in the middle of, and you should be damn thankful that one of the giant robots is protecting the peasants instead of firing giant fricking lasers at the Barn of Rights where all the Animals of Freedom are housed.
OSXCON panel on DRM and the Digital Hub (Score:2)
Save Money on Customer Support! (Score:2)
So we, as developers, need to figure out a way for the public to understand encryption for email security purposes, but keep digital media-reletated encryption confusing as hell!
lol (Score:2)
Any Open Source hardware projects out there
Draw the line between different product lines!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Incorporating DRM and such constraining technology
is to create a lessor in versatility product line.
There is a real and notable difference in such product lines. The DRM being closer to a consumer appliance then a computer.
It is outright FRAUD being directed at the consumers to deceive the consumers into thinking these two different product lines are one and the same, which they are in fact not.
Further more it is slanderious, libelious and inherently defamation of consumer character to base the proved false need for the incorporation of such constraning technology on the false claim that consumers are theives.
I have no problem with hose who want to create and sell such a product line inclusive of DRM and such. Nor do I have a problem with those who produce works only accessable by such DRM oriented devices.
What I have a problem with is the very clear intent to subvert consumer choice and free enterprise thru acts of deception and collusion on the part of industry and Government.
There are now two clearly different product lines.
One constrained by DRM based and like technology and the other not.
Knowing this is the first step towards properly addressing the deceivers and colluders.
Remember - it's spelled DRM (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not sure who originated the term, I first saw it attributed to RMS.
Digital Rights Management is total Orwellian double-speak.
In other news... (Score:3, Interesting)
Not to be left behind, all the other distros made similar proclamations, except Debian, which is late and expected to follow suit sometime next year.
Pretty shortly, the OS/2 development team will make a similar announcement, as will the FreeBSD teams, as will the QNX team, as will that guy down the road who wrote his own OS in assembler.
Secondly, this is a non story. Apple HAVEN'T made an announcement! Incredible. I haven't made an announcement today either, can I get a story on slashdot? In fact, the ONLY people who have announced their intention to support DRM are the one company that do in fact have a monopoly and can therefore do such an unpopular thing.
Finally, all those people who've posted things like "Wow, Apple you are clearly sticking up for my rights, I'll buy a Mac" are talking rubbish. Apple are famous for abusing the legal system whenever it suits them. They are a corporation, and know all about legal pressure points. If it turns out that this mystical all encompassing DRM strategy isn't working because the pirates are using Macs, then the RIAA will have a quick chat with Jobs, who will see where his best interests lie, and bingo suddenly QuickTime has DRM.
There is in fact only 1 type of OS that will never have DRM, guaranteed. Say no more.
Gotta love Jack... (Score:3, Funny)
``If this bill were to pass, it would render ineffective, worthless and useless any protection measure we would have in place to protect a $100 million movie,'' Jack Valenti, president of the Motion Picture Association of America, said of the Lofgren bill. ``You could download a million movies a day, and no penalty for it.''
Somehow I doubt that I could download a million movies a day. But I would love to see what kind of internet connection he has!
Re:obligatory slashdot comment (Score:2, Funny)
Re:They're finally doing SOMETHING right! (Score:2)
No, they have not done that. They simply haven't come forward to say much of anything on DRM. That doesn't mean that they won't. Be careful what you read into silence.
Re:They're finally doing SOMETHING right! (Score:2)
Re:They're finally doing SOMETHING right! (Score:2)
And they've done things right for a while. Like USB. And FireWire.
But what it comes down to is that they're a company that has to make money. This is a really good way to make money. The other guys don't let you use your computer. Mac OS X does. Ta daa!
(Offtopic rant: I've noticed that all of the non-Apple-lovers call it "OS X" while most people who like Apple call it "Mac OS X." I find that amusing. Despite all the things about toy computers that people have said for fifteen years, it's still a Mac.)
Re:What about Pixar? (Score:5, Informative)
Pixar is a public company (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What about Pixar? (Score:2)
Re:Think Different (Score:2)
Re:yeah! apple! (Score:2)
Re:Apple DRM (Score:2)
Besides, my MAC is kept on my network card and doesn't have an Intel chip anywhere near there.
I'll continue thinking I'm free and that you're a bozo.
Re:Now we know why "macs suck" (Score:2)