Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

April 28th Rumor Roundup

Re: Re: Re: Buttons on iPod

Originally posted by Molson
Firstly, I don't think the iPod could get any smaller as it's size is constrained by the size of the (already very small) hard drive inside.

Secondly, the Think Secret artist rendering (whilst it may be inaccurate) shows the dock to have a front lip which would would probably get in the way of the Play/Pause button (as it is positioned on the current iPod).

attachment.gif
Click to expand...

With advanced engenering, you never know about the size of things to come, but you are probably right that we won't see much size change (just speculation on my part). I used to carry my iPod in my top shirt pocket on the way to work, so i was happy...then of course Apple released the belt clip and remote...and noew i am happier.

The current design also allows you to use the iPod with either hand, what are your thought about the buttons with either hand?

Now, how about a remote with a display (like that for MD players)?
 
Now Billboard is reporting that the music service will debut on Monday. Seems to have the same info as the WSJ article, from the description of that article. Here's the link to the Billboard story:

http://www.billboard.com/bb/daily/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1874807

Excerpt:

Label sources tell Bulletin that the service is an a la carte download store -- not unlike that of rival Liquid Audio -- that is built into Apple's iTunes player. No subscription is required for the service, and tracks are expected to retail for an average of 99 cents. Once purchased, tracks are transferred to the consumer's iTunes music library and are automatically synched to the user's iPod portable player.
Click to expand...
 
3 macs- cool

My biggest concern was that the songs would be tied to a single Mac/iPod combo. My wife and I share an MP3 collection that I liten to on my desktop and she on her laptop- it would suck if we had to buy two copies to listen in the same house.

Then again, Steve's demo of Rendevous playlists implied that networked machines would be able to share their music without any limitations- so I guess it's not as big of a problem as I thought.

One presumes the upcoming iTunes update will enable that feature (first demo'd at what, MWNY last year?
 
Originally posted by Foxer
The link is sitting in front of me in pulp and ink... Page A1 above the fold. Can't miss it.

I suspect it is also available online at wsj.com.
Click to expand...

Too bad that I don't get WSJ. They also require an subscription to view articles online. It doesn't matter, I got the jist of that they are trying to say anyway,
 
Thanks for the round-up, really like those. No talk about iTunes 4, though? I guess it hasn't really been a rumor, just discussed here.

Anyway, the music service will probably come out on the 28th, along with new iPods and iTunes 4, but the rest of this stuff just seems like people getting their hopes too high. It was an announcement for a press invitation, and one that would logically be about music ("music to your ears"), not Apple saying they were going to make every rumor we've seen in the past few months come true. No 970's (especially in the 15'), no communication device, no potion that turns lead into gold. It's possible that they'll buy Universal then, though I doubt it, and I guess slightly possible about the communication device, but everything about this has been so vague I'm doubting that too. Of course, if I'm wrong, I'll be happy as all hell, but I don't think so.

One last thing, to the people who think the new button placement on the iPod is going to make you need two hands to operate it. Find a store that has the current iPods and try holding them. I have one, and honestly, it's small enough that this isn't even close to a problem. Even people with small hands, assuming we're not talking about very, very young children, should have no problem with it. That being said, yeah, I like the old design better too.
 
New iPod design

Having thought about it for a while, I'm still unclear about certain features of the new iPod design. Here's some ramblings...

1. Why 10, 15 and 30 GB sizes? Surely 10, 20 (current models) and 30 seems more likely (or even 10, 20 and 40). Could the 30GB model be singled out and have extra features like the Bestest / Fastest / Greatest models the desktop range used to have (eg Superdrive on the 'Fastest' model of original G4s). What could those feature(s) be? Colour screen maybe so you could see photos of your contacts? I expect the 10GB will be the same as the current model and the 15 and 30Gb will be the new design.

2. Why redesign what is already an excellent design? It seems logical that the docking station has forced the buttons to be moved (which will still be operable with a single hand). But why a docking station? I guess some way to lift the iPod of the desk and to protect it's derrier, whilst allowing it to transfer files at the same time. However could the docking station have a more important role? Couldn't the docking station have been designed to work with the existing form factor?

3. AAC encoding will be a new feature enabled in iTunes 4 and current iPod owners will require a Firmware update to make their iPods AAC compatible. Apple will not alienate the exisiting iPod owners. After all they want the iMusic service available to as many Mac / iPod users as possible.
 
Two things.

No Bluetooth headphones. For one go out there and try to source some that are shipping, good luck. Even if they were the quality isn't up there, it is a lot like the wireless headphones you can buy from radioshack, etc... even if you are willing to sacrifice some quality (remember you can only get 75k a second one way, bursting on bluetooth) the headphones are only going to have battery life of around an hour at most and still be comfortable to wear.

Secondly thirty gigs is too small. It may seem immense to those who don't already carry a lot of music around with them, but come on, the top of the line model is for the big spenders, the crazies, these people would be like me, the ones who have to struggle to decide which cd to remove when they buy a new one because their current 20g portable is already packed.
 
Originally posted by Foxer
In today's Wall Street Journal:

Nice tidbits about the music service coming next week. .99/song, $10/album. They've got artists that wouldn't allow their stuff on other download services. Stronger safegurads to prevent transferring songs from iPod to computer. Songs will be playable on only 3 macs.
Click to expand...

I wonder what "on 3 macs" means. If it means you have to register iTunes with an account and only 3 computers can have that account registered at a given time - that's fine. If it means 3 macs *ever*, obviously that is a problem.

And why all the fuss about iPod -> computer? I mean, I *am* going to be able to listen to them in iTunes and burn them to audio CD's, right? If they're only making it useful for iPod owners it won't be much of a hit.
 
If I buy music...

... I just want to be able to listen to it anywhere I want and anytime I want... I bought the right to listen to the music and to duplicate for my own use...

Why would Apple put limitations? It is my opinion that no limitations should exist for legally bought music...

Anyway... the buzz around April 28th has got me all excited... Another strange weekend in perspective...


Michel
 
OSX Media Center

I for one am hoping for the mac equivelent of Windows XP Media Center. This software is incredible and is getting more an more popular as people consider tivo alternatives. Being able to play and record tv on a crystal clear, wide-aspect ratio Apple screen under Panther would be awesome. The only hardware that would need to be added is a tv tuner and perhaps a 5.1 sound card.

Otherwise, I am going to have to buy one of those hp media center peecees.
 
Re: If I buy music...

Originally posted by mk_in_mke
... I just want to be able to listen to it anywhere I want and anytime I want... I bought the right to listen to the music and to duplicate for my own use...

Why would Apple put limitations? It is my opinion that no limitations should exist for legally bought music...l
Click to expand...

It is already incredibly easy to rip music from CDs and then share it with other users via Limewire etc... However, the downside of music illegally obtained from the internet (aside from it being illegal) is that the quality varies immensely, the ID tags are often incorrect or misspelt etc etc

If the Music service had no restrictions how long do you think it would be before music obtained this way (rather than from CDs) made it's way onto Hotline / Limewire servers? Especially since 'sharers' could guarantee it's quality and tags.

The record companies would never have agreed to digital distribution if it made it even easier for illegal copies to be shared and distributed illegally.

Hence restrictions will have to placed. Three computers / devices seems fair. What happens when you buy a new computer though, I'm not sure. Maybe the digital right license is linked to your name / address / credit card and when you move your music to your new computer all this information will have to be reentered to confirm you are the owner before the music can be played.
 
DRM in music service: Not for me

I'll be so disappointed if Apple DRM-ups the new iPods and iTunes. I have a collection of mp3s that get served by NFS from my apple to a network of PCs in my house - streamed to a RIO reciever, get burned to CDs to listen to in my car MP3 player, etc. In short, I do a lot with them, and I don't want someone telling me how to use them.

I'd use the Apple music service all of the time for $10/album if I could get real, unencumbered music files - it's worth the $10 to be "legit", to save the time and trouble of finding things on a P2P network.

However, if Apple makes it difficult for me to use my music, why would I buy from them?

Think about it. For $10, I get a bunch of files that have all of these restrictions. For $13, I can go out and buy the CD, and rip it into iTunes, and get the same quality with no restrictions. Do the math, it doesn't make sense.

Really, my whole attitude towards Apple starts to change if they start messing with DRM. Why invest in an iPod? Why invest in a mac?

Harumph, I'll be really pissed off if this happens.
 
Re: DRM in music service: Not for me

Originally posted by mstecker
For $13, I can go out and buy the CD, and rip it into iTunes, and get the same quality with no restrictions.
Click to expand...

However if the new version of iTunes has DRM, it may be that any music you rip using iTunes 4 is protected this way. Maybe mp3 encoding will be disabled. Maybe iTunes 4 will restrict you to AAC encoding only. Maybe this restriction is what swung the record companies into Apple's favour. It doesn't affect Apple at all - you can still Rip, Mix, Burn but this time with DRM enabled AAC (mp4).

Possible. mp3 has no advantages over mp4 (AAC) at all..... apart from lack of DRM!
 
Macminute will report live on Monday

According to MacMinute they will report live from the Apple special event.

MacMinute will be in attendance and bring you live coverage.
 
Re: Re: DRM in music service: Not for me

Originally posted by Molson
However if the new version of iTunes has DRM, it may be that any music you rip using iTunes 4 is protected this way. Maybe mp3 encoding will be disabled. Maybe iTunes 4 will restrict you to AAC encoding only. Maybe this restriction is what swung the record companies into Apple's favour. It doesn't affect Apple at all - you can still Rip, Mix, Burn but this time with DRM enabled AAC (mp4).

Possible. mp3 has no advantages over mp4 (AAC) at all..... apart from lack of DRM!
Click to expand...

Well, that's a pretty big advantage!

Obviously, the RIAA wouldn't be on board without DRM.

However, I tend to agree with the previous poster...exactly why would I want to pay for music that (a) violates the fair use laws; (b) is already compressed; and (c) really isn't that much cheaper?

I'm really surprised all of you are actually excited about someone telling you what you can do with music you purchase!

What this is, is the music industry attempting to sneak music 'licensing' (rather than purchasing) in under people's noses. Music is not software; once I own a copy of something, I ought to be able to do what I want with it, save for directly profiting from it myself.

I'll probably try this once or twice to see how it works, but I think I'll stick with my boycott against the RIAA. Music should not be encumbered, that's all there is to it.
 
Re: Re: Re: DRM in music service: Not for me

Originally posted by suzerain
Music is not software; once I own a copy of something, I ought to be able to do what I want with it, save for directly profiting from it myself.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that you will be able to copy the downloaded songs to your iPod if you have one and also burn your own CDs.

By the way the quality (even though it is compressed) should be pretty good if the comments about AAC are correct - read about AAC here.

You will also be able to share your music amongst 3 computers (if the rumours (English spelling ;) ) are true.

What else do you want to do with your music? I can't think of much more I'd want to do. I'm sure Apple will have a solution for me to stream it to my Hifi too. Some day.
 
of note

The acquisition of Virtual PC by Microsoft was raised by one shareholder. Jobs said that Apple's relationship with Microsoft is good and that Microsoft likes Safari. He also noted that VPC has been moved to the Mac Business Unit at Microsoft and that Microsoft acquired the software not so that it could get VPC itself, but its underlying technology. Jobs said Apple has talked with Microsoft, and Microsoft promises to continue the software. Jobs also suggested that the price might drop since royalties on Windows no longer have to be paid.
Click to expand...

At least it is MBU doing the work.

--

Music service thing... what happens when your imac hard drive dies a horrible grinding death? If I had the cd, I just spend time re-ripping all my stuff. If I downloaded it, I have to go get it again. What do you all think Apple's policy will be regarding re-downloading? IP based security is of no good...
 
Apple Store live feeds?

Where was the statement about the Apple store live feeds taken from? Did it come from apple.com? If it is a reliable source, I'm off to Emeryville to watch it!

Also: "The offering is expected to be made available initially only to users of Apple computers." -billboard.com

I am excited!:D
 
Re: of note

Originally posted by yzedf
Music service thing... what happens when your imac hard drive dies a horrible grinding death? If I had the cd, I just spend time re-ripping all my stuff. If I downloaded it, I have to go get it again. What do you all think Apple's policy will be regarding re-downloading? IP based security is of no good...
Click to expand...

Good point. I guess in this day and age though everyone should back up their computers regularly. You have to ask yourself the question, what would happen if my hard drive broke tomorrow?

If you don't backup regularly already, you should. My bosses laptop was stolen last year and luckily we had recently bought Retrospect and backed up the night before to a different computer. If it wasn't backed up he would have lost most of his life's work - and he is a leading scientist. As it was he only lost a few e-mails....
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: DRM in music service: Not for me

Originally posted by Molson
I'm sure that you will be able to copy the downloaded songs to your iPod if you have one and also burn your own CDs.


You will also be able to share your music amongst 3 computers (if the rumours (English spelling ;) ) are true.

What else do you want to do with your music? I can't think of much more I'd want to do. I'm sure Apple will have a solution for me to stream it to my Hifi too. Some day.
Click to expand...

Well, for starters...I have access to more than 3 Macs. Secondly, What about streaming to multiple Macs, as in an office, or large household?

Let me ask you a question: suppose CDs had a sticker on the outside that said, "You may play this CD in up to 3 stereos." Don't you see how ridiculous that is?

They're treating us -- computer users -- differently than the rest of the population, and it's just wrong.



By the way the quality (even though it is compressed) should be pretty good if the comments about AAC are correct - read about AAC here.
Click to expand...

Dude...there's no reason for you to be speculative about AAC; you can compress an AIFF into AAC right now using QuickTime. It's a good format. Some people, however, prefer Ogg Vorbis (myself, I think they are about on par in terms of quality, but of course Ogg files aren't DRM-restricted).

My point is...obviously, AAC is worse than redbook audio (native to CDs). It is compressed, and in some cases is indistinguishable from the original. In other cases, it's not.

So, you are paying for a worse quality file that you can only legally play on certain machines.

Hey, if that's what you want to spend your money on, I could care less. It's your money. But it sounds ridiculous to me.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: DRM in music service: Not for me

Originally posted by suzerain
Well, for starters...I have access to more than 3 Macs. Secondly, What about streaming to multiple Macs, as in an office, or large household?
Click to expand...

I don't think streaming will be affected. Remember Steve's demo of Rendezvous enabled iTunes last year? That will probably be in this version. However, you are only streaming the music to a local network - you are not physically copying the music to every computer on that network. This may also be the reason Apple stamped down on the iTunes sharing service iCommune. It was banned right at the time Steve was trying to get the record companies to sign up.

However, at what point does local streaming require you to pay royalties in much the same way that a radio station has to? That's an interesting debate..... Maybe rendezvous enabled iTunes streaming will be restricted to so many Macs at a time..... although it's bound to be more than 3. I think the 3 computer restriction will be only for the number of physical copies of the music files.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back