Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
No DRM in Headphones for New iPod Shuffle
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The current third-party headphones with remote controls do not work with the new shuffle. Apple's recent in-ear headphones may work with the new shuffle, not sure.
Wrong about what? I noticed you didn't quote any text that I was wrong about.
All the information I posted was directly from the Macworld article. I suppose you're taking issue with the "which may subject them to legal action" line. The DMCA is not the only legal concern here. Apple may well have patents for the new chip. I wouldn't put it past them to go after third-parties that reverse engineer the new headphone chip, they've did it for the dock connector (which ironically is part of the same "Made for iPod" program that the new headphone chip is a part of).
http://www.appletell.com/apple/comment/apple-defends-its-made-for-ipod-trademark-against-atico/
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...it_in_defense_of_made_for_ipod_licensing.html
Proof?
Is this proof enough that the iPod market is destined to take a hit during this economy?
Apple is grasping at thin air and trying to make a market out of it.
What's next? Apple 'not being able to guarantee that third party accessories (that have not paid for 'the chip') will function as designed'?
I smell the beginnings of desperation... Desperate to keep the profit margins up and the money coming in. Taking the iPod 'closed' could be a huge mistake for Apple but when you look, it's already pretty closed already.
Is this proof enough that the iPod market is destined to take a hit during this economy?
Apple is grasping at thin air and trying to make a market out of it.
What's next? Apple 'not being able to guarantee that third party accessories (that have not paid for 'the chip') will function as designed'?
I smell the beginnings of desperation... Desperate to keep the profit margins up and the money coming in. Taking the iPod 'closed' could be a huge mistake for Apple but when you look, it's already pretty closed already.
I assume the spelling and punctuation in your post and in your footer is a deliberate joke ? Just curious
. Apple gets thrown so much mud from everewhere, even at our phorums,whilst using that prementioned vista sonny lappie, I came to anohter coclusion, roll drums, we here some with being noteful others with their winhing. But it's what makes apple great: SCRUTINY on already great products. While poor vista Sony that none cares enough to ha a real community around they laptops ugly, with tackpads as large as the 1/10 of than on apple, awfull display that none notice......and let me remind allo....****** Vista too... First time I opened up this lappie and I got 10 warning messages from ogiginal vista.....I'm glad I wasn't the only one. To put DRM on an ANALOG OUTPUT of a device doesn't make sense in the least. The analog output will not allow for "perfect" copies of the original as it has to travel through the iPod's D-to-A converter.
This is a complete non-story. My Creative MP3 player from 2000 had a similar connector (3/8" four conductor) with inline controls. It also has a chip inside the controller.
The FUD surrounding Apple products continues to astound me.
W E A R E S A F E H E R E A T A P P L E.
The current third-party headphones with remote controls do not work with the new shuffle. Apple's recent in-ear headphones may work with the new shuffle, not sure.
Wrong about what? I noticed you didn't quote any text that I was wrong about.
I suppose you're taking issue with the "which may subject them to legal action" line. The DMCA is not the only legal concern here. Apple may well have patents for the new chip. I wouldn't put it past them to go after third-parties that reverse engineer the new headphone chip, they've did it for the dock connector (which ironically is part of the same "Made for iPod" program that the new headphone chip is a part of).
http://www.appletell.com/apple/comment/apple-defends-its-made-for-ipod-trademark-against-atico/
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...it_in_defense_of_made_for_ipod_licensing.html
You've got a point there, but let's take a look at the big picture:
Apple decides not to put controls on the new iPod shuffle by design. There's no open standard for the type of control on the headphones. Apple creates their own standard, but then have to distribute the protocol to third parties. They already have an infrastructure that deals with distributing information about interfacing the iPod, and it's the "Made for iPod" program.
Should they have made an exception for the headphone control protocol? Maybe, but then again, the same arguments against licensing in this particular case could apply to the whole "Made for iPod" program ("it's just a connector!", "it will increase the price of accessories!")
See, the iPod is popular, and third-parties are ready to pay to get the privilege of having the "Made for iPod" icon on their packages. Why shouldn't Apple make money out of it? It's called supply and demand, and capitalism. I won't deny the unfortunate effects of capitalism, but Apple has to compete in a capitalist market and maximize their profits to their shareholders.
And I doubt that third-parties got on the "Made for iPod" program just because they were afraid of being sued by Apple. The particular case you linked to (both links are about the same case) is the first known instance of Apple suing a company about it and it happened in 2008, and I can't find any other instances of a similar case since then.
Personally, I still think that the 1st gen iPod shuffle was the best one in terms of controls and form factor, but if you don't like the new one, don't buy it. I don't see it as setting any kind of "dangerous precedent" and potentially "nightmare scenario".
Especially since (let's use bold for this one): Apple publicly stated that they will release an adaptor that will work with all standard headphones. It may cost you extra, and be cumbersome, but all the concerns about locking out other third-party headphones are greatly diminished by this fact.
I think its a bit of a stretch to think of headphones as being some sort of iPod "part" or accessory. I think most people would think of the iPod's job as delivering audio out, not necessarily inclusive of particular headphones.
It seems that many folks here do not think this is a big deal - or that this is a non-story. And all of those people are either not smart at all, or they do not really understand what this article is saying. If you think this is a non-issue, you really need to go back, and read the article again, and then maybe again if you're really not smart. This chip is not nothing. It doesn't just sit in the earbuds and take up space. It is not necessary for the earbuds to work - so ask yourself why it's there. Will that chip's existence make your life better?
If you think Apple is acting like good guys here, your zealotry is far, far larger than your intellect could ever hope to be. That type of zealotry is why most people make fun of Apple fans.
If you think Apple is acting like good guys here, your zealotry is far, far larger than your intellect could ever hope to be. That type of zealotry is why most people make fun of Apple fans.
J
jmadlena
Guest
The chip is necessary for the buttons to actually function. You can't just press the center button and not have something there to actually make that into a useable signal for the shuffle. That is all this chip does: turn the physical button press into a signal for the iPod to interpret.
I don't think Apple is acting like a 'good guy,' but it isn't acting like a 'bad guy' either. This chip is totally necessary for the G3 shuffle to function, not just something they added in to mess with everyone.
Dont you love idle speculation?
"I dont know what it does, but it does SOMETHING, and thats bad!"
And all the fanatics will tell us how it doesn't matter that Apple keeps taking more and more steps into total control of all hardware, accessories and software for the Macintosh lines. I wouldn't be the LEAST bit surprised if Snow Leopard requires ALL software to be sold through the iTunes store with Apple taking 30% off the top of things like Photoshop next. Apple is getting out of control.
I used to think how great it would be if Macs could some day surpass greedy old Microsoft and put the Bill Gates foundation out of business. I now think Bill Gates is a flipping SAINT by comparison to Steve Jobs and the cronies running Apple. They DEFINE the words greed and control freaks.
Live a little? Why on earth would I want a player that forces me to either use POS earbuds that won't even stay in my ears and sound like a muffled fart or pay an exhorbitant fee for an adapter so I can use actual High Fidelity earphones with it? I don't know what that chip actually does, but whatever it is, it's NOT GOOD. You can be sure of that much. Maybe they'll have a certified for Apple mini-display port adapter chip next. Maybe you won't get quite as good of color definition without paying for a license to make an "official" adapter or something. It just smacks of EVIL to me. I'm really starting to wonder if I jumped out of the frying pan (Microsoft) and into the fire (Apple). Everything Apple does these days is to PREVENT HONEST COMPETITION. And what drives me nuts is how the fanatics think it's all OK and everything Apple does is great and for your best interests when in fact it's only for their pocket books. I had really hoped the move to Intel would finally mean decent prices and good value. Instead, it appears as if they are scheming as far fetched as they possibly can to get your every dime.
I think that was his point. His point was also that the chip already exists in the Apple Headphones with Remote and Mic and the Apple In-Ear Headphones with Remote and Mic, the former of which is identical to the Shuffle's headphones except the Shuffle's included headphones lacks the microphone. And it's because the Shuffle requires those controls that there's a big fuss over something that already existed since the original iPhone was released.
The most amusing part about all this is accessory companies already announced intentions to release headphones with the remote controls back in September. It's only now that there's a big fuss about it. Just leave it to the blog community to stir up controversy for Apple when the problem doesn't even exist.
Really, people still outraged about this little chip need to calm down. There isn't any sort of "nightmare scenario" to come from this. Here's a breakdown of the facts:
The worst that could come from this is that all remotes will require a "Made for iPod" license to work with future iPods. Headphones will continue to work as always. How is this a "nightmare scenario"?
- Apple decided to move the Shuffle's buttons off from the device itself to the earbuds.
- The buttons on the earbuds need some sort of protocol to communicate with the Shuffle.
- Apple designed a chip to define a standard protocol to handle button presses on the earbuds.
- If a third-party wants to make new headphones with a built-in remote to work with the Shuffle, they need access to the chip, which requires the "Made for iPod" License.
- This is also the case for the standard iPod Dock Connecter, which has been around for years.
The worst that could come from this is that all remotes will require a "Made for iPod" license to work with future iPods. Headphones will continue to work as always. How is this a "nightmare scenario"?
DRM? iPod Shuffle? So let me get this straight... people are worried that Apple is implementing DRM on the output of the iPod Shuffle, mere months after announcing that all iTunes music will be offered without DRM?
What exactly would preventing copying through the headphone output of the iPod accomplish? You can simply, y'know, copy the song from your hard drive. One could easily open iTunes Plus music in any audio editor/converter and change the format, so why the hell would one go through all the trouble to connect the iPod to the Line In and record their music, instead of simply copying/converting the file?
What exactly would preventing copying through the headphone output of the iPod accomplish? You can simply, y'know, copy the song from your hard drive. One could easily open iTunes Plus music in any audio editor/converter and change the format, so why the hell would one go through all the trouble to connect the iPod to the Line In and record their music, instead of simply copying/converting the file?
Other headphones work already, you just don't get the extra functionality as with the Apply-supplied ones.
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3472
To hear some of the crybaby hysterics on Digg and elsewhere, you'd think the world was coming to an end or something.
You have completely and utterly misunderstood what's being discuessed. Go back to the article and read it again.
+1
Also pretty disturbing was the number of posters over on AI who were justifying this alleged use of DRM - AI's biased article (by Prince Mclean, surprise surprise) even described it as "innovation."
+1
It makes the buttons work. Without it you can't control the iPod.
Take the tin foil hat off, for crying out loud.
That's right, insult everyone, then we'll all take you more seriously. And what does your vast intellect tell you this Evil Chip of Doom is for?
As a satisfied Mac user that is relieved to not have to use Windows, and who has the luxury of using perfectly integrated "made for" and "designed for" hardware/software, this is a non-issue. As in, I really don't care.
Apple isn't "acting like good guys", they're not acting like anything. In fact, it's a smart move to move the controls off the device. This new shuffle is another example of Apple just forging ahead in terms of design and dragging the rest of the industry with it, kicking and screaming.
Very nice idea to put the controls with the headphones. It's logical and very practical. Watch the rest of this half-asleep industry either follow suit or produce compatible headphones in no time. The iPod accessory market is absolutely huge.
Apple TAKES RISKS. It takes a little while for everyone else in the industry to get a clue, if they're not ooohhing and aahhhing from the get-go (enter the iPhone.) And then the copying ensues, as usual . . .
You can't be an Apple user and at the same time criticize their strict control over hardware and software. It is BECAUSE OF that strict control that Apple users have the kind of luxuries and user-experience that Windows users can only dream of. Think of the alternative. **shudders.**
Right, can someone clarify the following once and for all:
1) Can I control the new Shuffle effectively with legacy earbuds either manufactured by Apple or a third party OEM?
2) If I don't want to use Apple's earbuds then do third party earbuds have to use this protocol and, as such, have controls built into them?
3) Will I be able to buy an adapter whether this is from Apple or a third party which will perform this function and how much do you think these will cost?
4) If Apple don't grant a 'Made for iPod' license to, say, Sennheiser am I screwed?
1) Can I control the new Shuffle effectively with legacy earbuds either manufactured by Apple or a third party OEM?
2) If I don't want to use Apple's earbuds then do third party earbuds have to use this protocol and, as such, have controls built into them?
3) Will I be able to buy an adapter whether this is from Apple or a third party which will perform this function and how much do you think these will cost?
4) If Apple don't grant a 'Made for iPod' license to, say, Sennheiser am I screwed?
Why are most of you treating the Shuffle like a regular iPod??
It's an entry level/convenience product, nowhere near the level of the iPod Touch or even the Classic in terms of functionality/features. If all I need it for is, say, something quick to listen to now and then in cases where the iPod Touch or the iPhone would be too bulky, then I'm really not going to care about the luxury of using my favourite hot-**** third-party earbuds with it.
Who gives a damn if you can't use other earbuds with it? And if you care so much, you should have a standard iPod of some kind to begin with.
More proof that internet tech forums have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO with the needs, wants, and interests of the average user.
It's an entry level/convenience product, nowhere near the level of the iPod Touch or even the Classic in terms of functionality/features. If all I need it for is, say, something quick to listen to now and then in cases where the iPod Touch or the iPhone would be too bulky, then I'm really not going to care about the luxury of using my favourite hot-**** third-party earbuds with it.
Who gives a damn if you can't use other earbuds with it? And if you care so much, you should have a standard iPod of some kind to begin with.
More proof that internet tech forums have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO with the needs, wants, and interests of the average user.