The New iTunes Downgrade!

[Tequila Grandma]

IMO this is all about one thing: the ****ing iTunes Music Store. I seriously think that the one and only reason that Apple opted to eliminate the feature so quickly was because of pressure from the record companies, and Apple must currently be extra-nice to them because they're helping apple make craploads of money with their iTMS.

Personally, I don't care at all about the stupid music store. If I'm paying for music, I sure as heck had better get an insert and disc art. The sharing feature was a FAAAR more useful idea than the iTMS. I could share some of my music with other people without having to spend the time sending them mp3s through AIM. That was nice, and I really wanted to make more use of the feature. I drastically hope that the sharing feature returns with some tighter security, but for the time being, I'm sticking with 4.0

Arigato,
Brook

 

[Spart]

Re: Re: Re: Better than before

Originally posted by zigi
Nah, I'm listening to AAC's that I've ripped from my CD's. A noticable song was Cochise by Audioslave, after the intro when the guitar kicks in, the volume used to be pulled back by iTunes but it doesn't anymore.

Indeed, I'm loving this update. iTunes absolutely mangled Comfortable Liar by Chevelle among other songs. At first, I thought the sub was sucking power from the satelites (midranges.) Turned it down, though, and the midrange/highs were still getting slaughtered when the base hit...I guess I didn't notice the base dying because my system automatically amplifies the base. For a while there, the Finder was playing MP3's at a better quality than iTunes!

 

[gelbin]

Re: Re: the problem with another protocol is:

like you can record songs off the radio...
i think the issue is having it all contained on the computer, at some point, music is 'free' (radio etc.) it is the quality and format that is not free..

Originally posted by jettredmont
Yeah, but you can always do the same A/D conversion off the headphones jack too. Unless Core Audio is handling the MPG/layer3 and AAC conversion, which I don't believe is true but this isn't my area of expertise ...

 

[gelbin]

not really true

this is not really true.
there is such thing as 'fair use' exceptions in copyright law...

just like you can play cds at a party at your house, which if you had a large bar or dance hall you woul dhave to pay royalties, there are uses that constitute sharing that ARE legal.

Originally posted by nickgold
I hate to break it to some of you people, but even "sharing" music is illegal in most circumstances people were using iTunes 4.0 internet sharing for. It essentially amounts to copying the CD for your friends, and giving them a copy.

Think about it in these terms -- if the internet didn't exist, how would you "share" a CD with a friend? Legally? You would have to let them borrow it, which would mean that you could no longer play it yourself, while it was being borrowed.

iTunes 4.0 internet music sharing obviously allowed users to get around this "real-world" limitation, and that ticked the record companies off, for obvious reasons, IMO.

It was only a matter of time for the feature to be stripped out - I can't BELIEVE it made it into the final release at all, and in fact, I think it may have been more of an oversight than an intentional move.

 

[alset]

Well, we all saw this one coming, right?

Special thanks to those who ruined it for the rest of us. I took advantage iTunes sharing to access my entire music library (on my home machine) from any high speed access point using my iBook (like my college).

Maybe they're right when they say Apple gives it's customers too much credit.

Dan

 

[Rower_CPU]

I'm bumming. I have iTunes running (password protected to keep the moochers away) on a server at work, sharing over a week's worth of tunes that I listen to at work and at home. So, if I upgrade iTunes I won't be able to use my own music from home.

 

[AidenShaw]

Bet the IT departments were gonna get mad

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
I have iTunes running on a server at work

It would only be a matter of time before the IT departments would have noticed this traffic and blocked it.

Unfortunately, "work" has to pay a lot of money for the network bandwidth that they put in place to support the business.

Misappropriating that bandwidth for pleasure falls under the "misuse of company resources" clause at many companies.

 

[elo]

Yes, the sort of public streaming that people were engaging in is illegal (whether people harvest the music or not), so Apple had no choice but to act. And as someone else pointed out, Apple has not yet secured agreements from all of the "big five" record companies to allow use of their libraries in iTunes for Windows. Given the huge race for this market, this decision is a no-brainer for Apple.

Besides, once we all saw those sites listing hundreds of iTunes music libraries, did anyone seriously think that *could* last for long?

elo

 

[MrMacMan]

Re: Bet the IT departments were gonna get mad

Originally posted by AidenShaw
It would only be a matter of time before the IT departments would have noticed this traffic and blocked it.

Unfortunately, "work" has to pay a lot of money for the network bandwidth that they put in place to support the business.

Misappropriating that bandwidth for pleasure falls under the "misuse of company resources" clause at many companies.

He is the 'IT' department.
Don't blast a person before you know, well everything.

And the 'company' you say he works for is, um... I'll let him take over.

edit: gosh, I forgot that i was going to stay out of this, rower if I am wrong I give you (and other mods) permission to delete this post.

 

[Rower_CPU]

Re: Bet the IT departments were gonna get mad

Originally posted by AidenShaw
It would only be a matter of time before the IT departments would have noticed this traffic and blocked it.

Unfortunately, "work" has to pay a lot of money for the network bandwidth that they put in place to support the business.

Misappropriating that bandwidth for pleasure falls under the "misuse of company resources" clause at many companies.

Considering I am the IT department in my department, I seriously doubt it.

It's a campus network, as well, and is in place regardless of whether it's used or not.

You simply don't know enough of the facts of my case to be accusing me of misappropriating anything.

[edit: Jinx, MrMacman. ]

 

[zarathustra]

I don't know why some people have their panties in a wad - so you can't share over the internet. Big deal. itunes sharing was never meant to be over the internet - like others pointed out.

If you want to take your music with you, buy an MP3 player (maybe the iPod ). Even in a closed network, specifically at work, I get tired of sharing music with my cowerkers, because most of their music sucks. I find bands on allmusic.com. If I they are in the iTMS, I listen to sample, if I like that I buy song. If they are not in the store, I put on some pants and mozy over to Good records or CD source and buy the damn CD. Used, for 7.99 or less.

<generalization>

People foaming at the mouth about this update were:

A) doing something illegal to begin with
B) too cheap to do it legally
C) teenagers with cracking voices who need to impress their friends for social status.

</generalization>

I installed it, and it's just fine.

 

[h'biki]

Re: The New iTunes Downgrade!

Originally posted by MrMacman
Boo!

I'm really pissed, how why the hell did they take sharing out of iTunes 4.0.1, god damn, they could have stopped Downloading, instill they do this, god apple you are making me Really pissed!

As others have alluded to, its very probable Apple got leant on regarding music sharing.

Whatsmore, there is plenty of debate regarding the legality of 'stream sharing' (whether or not it allows you to download). Its not a clear case of it being legal. Its quasi-legal at best, although, as I understand it, the DMCA has regulations regarding streaming in it.

So Apple has probably felt some pressure and has decided to go for the safe side rather than face possible future legal action.

 

[AidenShaw]

Note that I said "the IT departments"

Originally posted by MrMacman
He is the 'IT' department.

Note that I used the plural, the IT departmentS....


In larger companies, the traffic through the firewall is a big expense - and the IT department has to justify upgrades when performance is suffering.

A little bit of use won't be noticed, but it only takes 8 of these streams to fill a 1Mbps pipe... A small office, with a DSL line - oops. Guess you can upgrade to T-1 - for about $500 per month - to support iTunes.

Big company, a few hundred iTunes listeners. That'll need a T-3 line at $10K to $20K per month. I'm sure the CIO and CEO will quickly approve that for music sharing as a morale-booster.

Don't blast a person before you know, well everything.

Don't blast off a reply without carefully reading the post first.

I did not make any specific accusations, witness the deliberate plural use of the word "departments".

All this talk of people "listening to their home music from work" is something that just won't fly in the long run - at least not until bandwidth is much cheaper than it is today.


(Prices from http://www.bandwidthsaving.com/T1prices.cfm )

 

[Wonder Boy]

I am too lazy (and sick) to search through the posts, so I'll ask my question blindly-

If I have iTunes open on my iBook, can I still access my music on my iMac's opened iTunes library?

Hey, thanks a lot.

 

[MrMacMan]

Re: Note that I said "the IT departments"

Originally posted by AidenShaw
Note that I used the plural, the IT departmentS....


In larger companies, the traffic through the firewall is a big expense - and the IT department has to justify upgrades when performance is suffering.

A little bit of use won't be noticed, but it only takes 8 of these streams to fill a 1Mbps pipe... A small office, with a DSL line - oops. Guess you can upgrade to T-1 - for about $500 per month - to support iTunes.

Big company, a few hundred iTunes listeners. That'll need a T-3 line at $10K to $20K per month. I'm sure the CIO and CEO will quickly approve that for music sharing as a morale-booster.




Don't blast off a reply without carefully reading the post first.

I did not make any specific accusations, witness the deliberate plural use of the word "departments".

All this talk of people "listening to their home music from work" is something that just won't fly in the long run - at least not until bandwidth is much cheaper than it is today.


(Prices from http://www.bandwidthsaving.com/T1prices.cfm )

Again you are supposing that I have a fully connected network, that I have max users on all the time with like 320 KB music...

I wasn't trying to blast you, but you refered to Rower, Directly, quoting him, you you wish to speak generally, don't quote.

Tell me how many people are going to access your private iTunes sharing network?

How many people know? I doubt anyone besides you unless you want people to know. Anyway who's bandwitch are you using if you are hosting the files from your house?

Your house -- upload
Company -- download

Unless you want to max out connected users then you don't have a problem what so ever.

(what encoding do you use? Something higher than 320? )

 

[eric_n_dfw]

Network cops

I work for a VERY big company and they would stomp on us in a second if we started streaming music between machines - even between machines on one of the internal networks - but especially through the firewall. In fact, if I found out that my X Window sessions were being slowed down by some idiots streaming MP3's (or AAC's) between themselves, I'd have have NOC plug that port up imediately. Many of you would be amazed at how fast a couple hundred users can eat a full duplex, 100base-t network up. (Our shop is heavily X Window dependant and uses Samba-ClearCase shares and NFS mounts a lot)

Another thing I have to wonder about - how many people who are just sharing files from their home have the upload speeds to handle it? My DSL provider caps me at 128kbit/sec unless I pay the big $$$ for more. (I so miss Sprint ION and my 1Mega-bit uplaod speeds!)

 

[nickgold]

Originally posted by Tequila Grandma
IMO this is all about one thing: the ****ing iTunes Music Store. I seriously think that the one and only reason that Apple opted to eliminate the feature so quickly was because of pressure from the record companies, and Apple must currently be extra-nice to them because they're helping apple make craploads of money with their iTMS.

Personally, I don't care at all about the stupid music store. If I'm paying for music, I sure as heck had better get an insert and disc art. The sharing feature was a FAAAR more useful idea than the iTMS. I could share some of my music with other people without having to spend the time sending them mp3s through AIM. That was nice, and I really wanted to make more use of the feature. I drastically hope that the sharing feature returns with some tighter security, but for the time being, I'm sticking with 4.0

Arigato,
Brook

Waaaaaaah waaaah waaaaah I'm a whiny little high-schooler whose daddy bought him a Mac, and I'm too cheap to actually buy anything because it's always been given to me in place of genuine love, and if I wanna break the law and copy MP3s for my friends, I should be able to, and Apple should actively help me do it. Waaaaah.

Do the whiners realize just how lame they really sound? Does the above person realize sharing MP3s over AIM with friends is blatantly illegal? Do the people crying about fair use actually even know what fair use means, or did they just hear the phrase on the internet somewhere?

Maybe a requirement for posting on here should be you have to be above 15 years old, or, you have to have bought your own Mac? Seems like it would weed out most of the more obnoxious people -- Oh wait, that's 80 percent of the board, that would never fly...

Sorry Arn, no offense -- the site is great, the average readers/posters are -- lame.

 

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by Wonder Boy
I am too lazy (and sick) to search through the posts, so I'll ask my question blindly-

If I have iTunes open on my iBook, can I still access my music on my iMac's opened iTunes library?

Hey, thanks a lot.

If your iMac and iBook are on a home network, I'd say you are 99.99% likely able to access them (unless you have set up multiple subnets in your own home, which would only be done if you are an IT geek who needs to do testing across domains from the comfort of home ...)

If your iMac is at home and you are hooking in to the 'net from Starbucks' access point on your iBook, then the answer is no.

 

[Monkeypoo]

follow up on simple question above

If I take my powerbook home where my mom has an imac, will we need a wireless network for this sharing to occur (not talking about the streaming that apparently I never really noticed before listening to the complaints here)? Or will we need some sort of home network set up either wireless or wired. The demo when the new ipod was announced made it sound so simple that all that was required for sharing was for two rendezvous enabled computers to be in the same relative area (any max on the distance between two computers?).

where do i find out if our computers have the rendezvous capability? My world consists of only my powerbook so I never really bothered to look into this even though more and more of my classmates are getting ibooks or powerbooks (every year an apple rep comes to the med school to promote them)

 

[Rower_CPU]

Re: Note that I said "the IT departments"

Originally posted by AidenShaw
Note that I used the plural, the IT departmentS....

In larger companies, the traffic through the firewall is a big expense - and the IT department has to justify upgrades when performance is suffering.

A little bit of use won't be noticed, but it only takes 8 of these streams to fill a 1Mbps pipe... A small office, with a DSL line - oops. Guess you can upgrade to T-1 - for about $500 per month - to support iTunes.

Big company, a few hundred iTunes listeners. That'll need a T-3 line at $10K to $20K per month. I'm sure the CIO and CEO will quickly approve that for music sharing as a morale-booster.

[...]

I did not make any specific accusations, witness the deliberate plural use of the word "departments".

All this talk of people "listening to their home music from work" is something that just won't fly in the long run - at least not until bandwidth is much cheaper than it is today.


(Prices from http://www.bandwidthsaving.com/T1prices.cfm )

Yes, you said departments. What's your point? I, as the head of one of these departments, am responsible for the traffic in my department. If something's up, the campus network group lets me know.

You overlooked my post, for some reason, which explicitly said this is not a "business" but a campus. The network is self-supported in terms of equipment and personnel. There are no "costs", as you describe them.

You also overlook the fact that iTunes only supports 5 listeners at a time. That leaves the bandwidth used at well under 1Mbps of our 100Mbps line - if all the connections are being used. With the password protection I rarely saw more than two people on at a time, anyway.

You did make specific accusations. "Misappropriating bandwidth for pleasure" was a direct accusation (an inaccurate one under the circumstances) since you were referring to my scenario.

Let's not pursue this further.

 

[usersince86]

Originally posted by MrMacman


If apple wanted to keep the damned record company's happy they could just join the suit against all of the 'evil' P2P users and groups.

This is utter BS.
They could have stoped the downloading, they could have sued the devolpers for making the apps, but no, apple pulls the whole plug.

Its like a doctor saying they only need to cut a toe nail and the mother says it is just better to cut off the toe.

Gimme a break!

What is your real gripe? What were you using the network sharing for? Sounds like someone's mad for some, uh, interesting reasons. Maybe you have legitimate complaints, but it doesn't appear that you have expressed them clearly (at least in my opinion).

I'M NOT ACCUSING YOU OF PIRACY...

but to those who do it and see no problem, to me this is like getting mad because a music store puts a security device on a CD so it's harder for people to shoplift. Piracy is no different than walking into a store, sticking a CD (music or software, for that matter) in your coat, and walking out without paying.

Don't pretend it's something else.

 

[AidenShaw]

IT DOESN"T SCALE

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
You also overlook the fact that iTunes only supports 5 listeners at a time. That leaves the bandwidth used at well under 1Mbps of our 100Mbps line - if all the connections are being used.

And more sharers, and more listeners, and pretty soon that big 100Mbps pipe's gonna seem pretty slow. No problem if everyone on campus starts up a server, right?

Sure, one server on a 100Mbps LAN doesn't amount to much. Do you really have a 100Mbps feed to the Internet? That's pretty expensive at market rates. (My home office is all GigE, but only 1.5Mbps DSL to the net.)

It's "home" and "work" that's really going to cause problems - not "dorm room" and "computer center".... Re-read "eric-n-dfw's" comment - that's the more common business situation that I'm talking about. Your small "self-supporting" campus network isn't the point of my arguments - look outside your own situation and learn, your post triggered a more general response from me.

 

[MrMacMan]

Originally posted by usersince86
What is your real gripe? What were you using the network sharing for? Sounds like someone's mad for some, uh, interesting reasons. Maybe you have legitimate complaints, but it doesn't appear that you have expressed them clearly (at least in my opinion).

I'M NOT ACCUSING YOU OF PIRACY...

but to those who do it and see no problem, to me this is like getting mad because a music store puts a security device on a CD so it's harder for people to shoplift. Piracy is no different than walking into a store, sticking a CD (music or software, for that matter) in your coat, and walking out without paying.

Don't pretend it's something else.

Originally posted by MrMacman (page 2)
I have a friend across town who has an almost un-limited song database, now I can't access it, do I want him to illegally burn those songs to give to me?
No!
I was sharing, listeing to them, not downloading them, why should I be punished?

Maybe someone didn't... you know what, I don't care.

I had people accessing my music and I was accessing my friends, no foul play.

Originally posted by AidenShaw
And more sharers, and more listeners, and pretty soon that big 100Mbps pipe's gonna seem pretty slow. No problem if everyone on campus starts up a server, right?

Sure, one server on a 100Mbps LAN doesn't amount to much. Do you really have a 100Mbps feed to the Internet? That's pretty expensive at market rates. (My home office is all GigE, but only 1.5Mbps DSL to the net.)

It's "home" and "work" that's really going to cause problems - not "dorm room" and "computer center".... Re-read "eric-n-dfw's" comment - that's the more common business situation that I'm talking about. Your small "self-supporting" campus network isn't the point of my arguments - look outside your own situation and learn, your post triggered a more general response from me.

Yes, Rower look, it can DESTROY the people who want to open their computers so others can share the music, IT WILL CRIPPLE THEM!

Its simple as not sharing, or not accessing.
If you don't want either, then it will not hard you.

How many people are your giving access to your work server? the max? 5?
Okay so even with simple cable you can probably support this... even I could.

 

[GeeYouEye]

They'd have to come up with a danged better feature to get me to go past 4.0, especially given my particular situation... I'll spare the details of it (it involves a badly but necessarily placed AirPort Base Station, and a small Ethernet network that I don't quite know how I got set up), but suffice to say I can't stream the music from my iBook (which has all the music) to my iMac (which is connected to the stereo) without using the Connect To... dialog.

This is one update I won't be getting.

Or actually... I wonder... *goes off to look at InterfaceBuilder*

 

[nickgold]

Originally posted by GeeYouEye
They'd have to come up with a danged better feature to get me to go past 4.0, especially given my particular situation... I'll spare the details of it (it involves a badly but necessarily placed AirPort Base Station, and a small Ethernet network that I don't quite know how I got set up), but suffice to say I can't stream the music from my iBook (which has all the music) to my iMac (which is connected to the stereo) without using the Connect To... dialog.

This is one update I won't be getting.

Or actually... I wonder... *goes off to look at InterfaceBuilder*

You know what Interface Builder is, but can't set up a home network? What is this, another failure of the American educational system or what?