Apple's iPod Chip Supports WMA? 84
John writes "Chip manufacturer Portal Player in Santa Clara builds the embedded PP5002 chip in Apple's iPod (allowing the playing of AAC and MP3). It has emerged that the chip firmware, by default, allows the playing of WMA. However, for some reason this is locked by Apple."
"for some reason" (Score:4, Funny)
Re:"for some reason" (Score:3, Funny)
Slashdot editors allow the writing of passive sentences...
"For some reason" ? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:"For some reason" ? (Score:1, Flamebait)
So, since we know this as a fact, something more dubious must be afoot! Like, Micro$hafT is being EVIL! AND preventing from Apple from making it an OPEN STANDARD! MUST BE!
Re:I would do the same (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I would do the same (Score:3, Interesting)
In all fairness, M$ does spend plenty of money on non-software R&D, including the salaries of very smart engineers who know how to design audio codecs. I live in the Seattle area, and one of my family members is involved with the local section of the AES (Audio Engineering Society). They had an all-day seminar recently about "Sampling, Conversion, and the Lim
Re:I would do the same (Score:1)
Re:Ogg! Custom plugins! Grr! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Ogg! Custom plugins! Grr! (Score:4, Informative)
Sorry, wrong, it is a general purpose chipset. See:
http://www.amd.com/de-de/FlashMemory/FlashApplicat ions/0,,37_1736_6577_8011,00.html
Which states:
The PP5002 SuperIntegration(TM) System-On-Chip features dual ARM7TDMI (R) microprocessors.
Re:Ogg! Custom plugins! Grr! (Score:5, Interesting)
There's nothing WMA-specific about the chip. It's (as the above poster noted) basically two ARM7 cores, cache, and some I/O logic that makes it especially well-suited to low-power devices.
Portal Player did not design the PP5002C for the iPod; it is equally well at home playing AIFF, mp3, AAC, whatever - another WMA-compatible player could as easily use the PP5002 as a CPU - but an extremely capable little media CPU is all that it is - there's nothing WMA specific about the PP5002.
Re:Ogg! Custom plugins! Grr! (Score:1)
Re:Ogg! Custom plugins! Grr! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Ogg! Custom plugins! Grr! (Score:1)
ah, but can the battery handle it?
Re:Ogg! Custom plugins! Grr! (Score:1, Troll)
Don't go telling the mods that though, they need someone to modbomb totally unfairly. As far as they're concerned, I must be a mac basher. The irony is that I'm typing this on my ibook.
What about playing AAC elsewhere (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What about playing AAC elsewhere (Score:3, Insightful)
But that still leaves your original question: Why not support (non-DRM) AAC?
Re:What about playing AAC elsewhere (Score:4, Insightful)
Just as saying "We support WMA" creates the expectation of supporting WMA with DRM, so it is with AAC.
That being said, they could offer "unsupported" support for AAC. It could be helpful to sales to let it slip that the non-DRM AAC files are playable.
Which raises the question... (Score:1, Insightful)
Anyway, you have raised an excellent point!
WMA (Score:2, Informative)
License fees (Score:5, Informative)
In addition there is also a royalty involved. For WMA this is true but for AAC you pay only an upfront fee ($15000) [vialicensing.com] but no royalties. That might be a reason not to support WMA by default in the iPod!?
Re:License fees (Score:1)
Re:License fees (Score:3, Funny)
And wouldn't it be nice if my ass played OGGs files too? Then I wouldn't even need an iPod or any other player!
Wouldn't it be nice if it had a codec for NewtonScript bytecode? I mean, think about it; if you can have the spec for AAC, OGG and WMA, it is just a small step to get to decoding bytecode, and NewtonScript bytecode is even simpler than Java's. So...
I think Apple is going to come out with a new PDA very soon. It'll be called the iOggtonpod. It'll OWN!
Re:License fees (Score:2)
WMA licensing fees [microsoft.com] are much less.
Re:License fees (Score:2)
After all, if it's a boring, non-DRM'd WMA, why not just convert it to AAC or MP3?
Re:License fees (Score:2)
Well, that's totally wrong. With AAC, there is a royalty on encoders and decoders. Generally, almost all AAC fees are higher than WMA fees.
And yes, I realize this is redundant, but there are some people who like to moderate as "troll" anything that corrects pro-Apple FUD, so a little redundancy is useful to make it harder on them. :-)
Re:License fees (Score:1)
FYI, I use MacOS9, Win2K at home and Debian Linux at work (and at home sometimes).
Re:Show me the money (Score:4, Funny)
>> How about because they didn't pay for it?
> Because it's a terrible file format compared to MP3, and MP3 is already the standard?
And this, boys and girls, is why you should read the comments twice before replying to them.
-fred
So... (Score:3, Funny)
Wait a minute... I don't own an iPod! Or any .WMA files! GAAAH!
It's more complicated than that (Score:5, Interesting)
although that's the implication in the article.
Well yeah, the chip supports it. but that's just a small part of the total system.
Apple would also have to integrate WMA into iTunes for Mac and Windows.
To really do it right, it might be added at a lower level into Mac OS X as well.
That now ties Apple into paying M$ royalties on iTunes and iPod, perhaps even
OS X, and having to continually disclose to M$ on the number of units sold and to who.
I think that Apple would want to avoid any further entanglements with M$ if they
can be avoided. They know well what happens when you dance with the devil.
Apple has probably suffered more from Microsoft's abusive practices than anyone.
And one more thing... Drop the constant whining about OGG. Please.
Re:M$ has propped up Apple (Score:2, Informative)
Neither massive, nor a bailout.
I think maybe you mistook Bill Atkinson for Gates.
Re:It was a bailout (Score:5, Informative)
> some of the many many examples?
And it is well documented that one of the reasons that everybody thought it was a bailout was because nobody was allowed to mention the real reason that it happened. Which was because Apple discovered that MS had stolen the source code for QuickTime and inserted it whole-cloth into their competing product. Lawsuit, settlement, and large investment.
Of course, you've heard all of this before and chosen to ignore it all, so I'm sure I can't convince you of anything. But I worked at Apple for a while, and know a couple of the people who were involved in the trial.
Basically, Apple got some money when it needed it (although they did still have billions in cash and assets, the stock purchase definitely helped), and Microsoft got to look like a 'good company' at a time it needed it. A win-win settlement.
-fred
Bill Gates there at the birth of Mac (Score:2, Interesting)
"...January 1984 launch, Gates shifted gears and decided to put Excel onto the Mac first. "We bet on the Macintosh, hoping Windows would come in sooner rather than later," Raikes remembers.
It was a big wager, indeed. Gates committed fully one-third of Microsoft's programming resources to the Macintosh, putting Jeff Harbers in charge of the project. "We were complete Mac fanatics," remembers Harbers....
"I remember having a meeting with Ballmer and the [Microsoft] Mac team
Re:M$ has propped up Apple (Score:2)
Re:M$ has propped up Apple (Score:1)
Huh-huh. If you really work for Apple, then you'd know the stuff about Microsoft "bailing out" Apple was a bunch of huey.
How gullible do you think we are? (Score:1)
What was well documented was the amount of assets Apple had at the time. A 150 million dollar stock buy plus an undisclosed settlement with a company that has over 2 billion in liquid assets does not a buyout make.
Go back to your bridge.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:It's more complicated than that (Score:5, Interesting)
Either way, it's quite interesting to see it there.
You sir. (Score:1)
As if there weren't enough.
The pain of moving all my files.
The lack of a good portable player. I like my mp3 portable cd player and mp3 playing dvd player.
The constant explaining to people when I tell them I use OGG ( "OGG what's that? Oh it's music, like MP3.")
If OGG is better then MP3 it's only marginally better.
The only reason that I have any AAC files in my collection is because of iTMS.
Re:You sir. (Score:1)
Then why use it? Having a collection that is like 25% ogg
iRiver and Rio have Ogg players now. Let's hope more will follow.
you continue to hope, I'll listen to music.
Re:You sir. (Score:2, Insightful)
Well that's hardly a good reason to switch to OGG.
If you want to switch to OGG, fine go ahead, but expecting other people to switch because of moral reasons is silly.
It's only recently that OGG has stablized the format anyway. I was encoding mp3s back in 1996 when OGG was no where near done.
Re:You sir. (Score:1)
It does if you intend to lower licensing fees (which is what the grandparent intended).
Re:It's more complicated than that (Score:3, Funny)
So you think they should drop mp3 support and just run ogg???
Wow, that's a business strategy. And they say Mac users are delusional....
Re:It's more complicated than that (Score:4, Insightful)
The solution? Keep MP3 and AAC capability on the iPod, but *add* OGG and start pushing it. Apple is the ONE company who can make the revolution happen. Instead, the rumors are they will not add OGG (which gives greater freedom to the user), but WMA (which places greater restrictions on the user)...
And yes, I am delusional. Doctor Scooby is self-prescribing again.
Re:It's more complicated than that (Score:2)
I agree that supporting more formats, including OGG would be good for all.
Re:It's more complicated than that (Score:1)
In the grand scheme of things... (Score:2)
Re:In the grand scheme of things... (Score:1)
So? The above is far more true of floppies than of zips. Even the drives are cheaper, unless your time isn't worth anything. Floppies are just about the most expensive storage medium available, the slowest, and the least reliable.
I'd be surprised if more than 5% of computers had a zip drive.
Heh. Any environment were you had to move files on a regular basis was likely to have zip drives, because floppies were too small and too
Re:It's more complicated than that (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It's more complicated than that (Score:3, Interesting)
I already rip my CDs to AAC format instead of MP3 for the higher quality/smaller filesize. So why would I need OGG?
Re:It's more complicated than that (Score:2)
What you mean by "open"? You have to pay license fees to write AAC codecs. Compare the AAC [vialicensing.com] and OGG [vorbis.com] licences.
No control for Apple (Score:3, Insightful)
This is no different than Microsoft wanting to push their own formats above all others.
Re:No control for Apple (Score:2, Informative)
I agree that Apple could also have Ogg, or any other format easily, but right now they are not going
PP5002 Spec (Score:4, Informative)
WMA is indeed supported.
WMA can be a deal breaker for some people (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:WMA can be a deal breaker for some people (Score:1)
Re:WMA can be a deal breaker for some people (Score:3, Informative)
Re:WMA can be a deal breaker for some people (Score:2)
Re:WMA can be a deal breaker for some people (Score:1)
Future Marketing? (Score:1)
Duh (Score:1)