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

Boycott Universal

Re: Why no Mac, DVD, PS Support

kemal>Newer Macintosh machines (starting with colors) use the ATAPI
interface to send the digital audio off the drive, not the 3 or four wire
analog cable. Therefore, these drives are reading the audio tracks as
files. If these files contain *induced damage*, the computer will view
them as corrupted files and quit.


If it's digital it will be ripped. True, having the data read as `files'
rather than having it spat out the audio passthrough as a DACed signal
will result in problems. Surely the error-correction can be implemented in
software though? The on-board DAC spits out audio which is corrected on
the fly, the logic to instruct the DAC on how to correct the data is
contained in firmware, just do the same thing at the userlevel. Cdparanoia
does that as I recall; any other Mac rippers do that? Fortunately there's
only so much one can do; the discs still have to play in stereos (with
acceptable quality) limiting the amount of damage which can be introduced.
 
Screw Em

The Market will decide the stupidity of this on it's own. Anything we tell them will make it easier for them to build it right. I'd rather the greedy bastards crashed and burned while money is still tight. If we tell them how every little Hack works, they'll eventually do it right. The first rule of Intelligence is keep yer mouth shut.

Think about it, they're screwing the Artists on one end and us on the other and making rediculous money at it. If they want to let their greed destroy them, so be it.
 
A few thoughts...

Ever since I heard about this for the first time on Slashdot, I've been thinking about what shape this copy protection must take, to work on Windows PCs but not on Macs, and here's my take.

Macs have used industry-standard hardware for years. The CD-Rom drive in my Mac could easily be shoved into a Pentium box and made to work flawlessly. So whatever keeps it from working on Macs, it's not something in the hardware. So that leaves the software. But there can't be some additional piece of software that it takes to play the audio, because then NO piece of home audio equipment would play it.

Here's my guess as to what the CDs actually are: they're *multisession* discs with one Audio CD session and one ISO9660 session. The Audio CD session has the music, but with some distortion introduced into the signal before pressing that is removed by the noise-reduction circuitry present in home audio equipment, but not in CD-Roms (because circuitry like that in a computer would result in bad reads of computer data). The second, ISO session contains the music in some sort of proprietary, MP3-ish format like Liquid Audio or Windows Media, but tied into some pay scheme. Probably this has something to do with Pressplay (Universal's new internet music service, http://www.pressplay.com) and requires software that's PC only.

So that's how they get to be incompatible with Macs. And if I'm right, this also leaves BeOS, Amiga, BSD, and Linux users also shut out of Universal's plans for the future. Between these platforms (and everything else except Windows) I don't think that it will be particularly hard to implement a software version of the error-correcting circuitry present in the hardware of Universal-comptaible CD equipment, and then port that to all platforms. Until then, anyone who really wants to rip a Universal CD can just run a $5 Radioshack cable from the headphone jack of a CD player to the mic jack of his Mac and record the tracks at 1x. (Oops..does saying that put me in violation of the DMCA again? Damn.)
 
KILL EM ! ! ! ! ! !

**** MICROSHIT AND ALL THEIR ALLIES I HATE THOSE GUYS... I JUST GOT AM iPOD.. HOE AM I SUPPOSED TO GET MUSIC ON IT???????

GOD **** THOSE ASSWHOLES!!!!
 
tcolling- a reply

As an Objectivist, I doubt you would find anyone more pro-business or pro-intelectual property than I am. But your ideas smack of dogmatism and are contrary to logic.

First, a copy protection scheme which punishes honest users for the 10% who are dishonest is a a bad business practice. Remember all the software that was copy-protected in the late 80's and early 90's? No one bought it and it was abandoned. This is a business practice which has been tried and has failed.

Second, it is not unreasonable for us to ask for a cheaper product if the record company is going to infringe on our fair use, because in real terms, a copy protected item is of less use to the consumer. For example, if I buy a CD which ONLY plays on my car's CD player, but not on my DVD player and not on my Mac, that CD better be substantially cheaper for it to make sense for me to to purchase it. Of course, the THEORY is that this measure will stop piracy, but in reality, it will limit the use by the honest consumer, and the "pirate" will hack the CD anyway. If the company fails to offer a reasonable choice to comsumers, a black market will develop (or in this case spread). Black markets ALWAYS operate and spread in circumstances where a desirable good or service is either over priced, in short supply, or both. It is up to the record company whether they choose to offer value or keep prices jacked up and push more and more people into casual piracy.

Third, EVERY for profit company is in business for one reason--to make a profit. The type of product or service offered dictates price and penetration into the market. For example, a fur coat (a luxury item) is several thousands of dollars, and it is understood that it will have a low market penetration (you aren't going to sell a whole lot of them, but you make your profit on per unit sales). On the other hand, there is the gallon of milk, which is more of a necessity. It is a low dollar item, with a high market penetration. Per unit, the company is probably making about .50 on a gallon of milk, but they sell 100,000 gallons per day, so they make their profit. The problem here is that record companies want to treat their music like a luxury item when it comes to profit per unit, but other times (re: units sold) as a common necessity.

I stand by my earlier analogy--record companies bust their hump to get their target artists airplay--the reason they do it is that they understand that the more people hear, the more likely they will go buy the CD. Period. But for some reason, some number cruncher sold these guys a bills of goods that, somehow, letting someone give their friend a track off of a CD is going to cut into sales. My response? Why dont they cut off radio airplay? Sure, they are getting some royalties for airplay, but it is not their bread an butter income--that comes from CD sales. And to the comsumer, they ARE giving away the music for free over the airwaves. It is child's play to equip your computer with a radio tuner and "steal" the music that way.

Finally, I dont think anyone disagrees that a company ought to be left alone to make a profit--thats capitalism, and it is in a large part why we enjoy the life we do in the US (and in much of the world). But we as comsumers have EVERY RIGHT to criticize a company that wants to charge us more, give us less, and single-handedly re-write what fair use means. Just because several companies are trying it (M$, Universal) does not mean we have to like it or put up with it, or watch it silently because the company is only pursuing profits. We have a right to vote with our dollars, and spread the word thru email, conversation, petition, etc. To suggest otherwise is un-American.
 
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