4 ms·

So your saying that Apple should simply drop a protocol they invented in 2004 for one that came wasn't developed until 2006 and didn't gain any traction until 2

by yardie 16y ago

So your saying that Apple should simply drop a protocol they invented in 2004 for one that came wasn't developed until 2006 and didn't gain any traction until 2010?

ZeroGravitas 16y ago
It's not obvious what you're referring to, but the answer's "yes", Apple should be working with others instead of re-inventing square wheels that happen to fit only their car and come with licence fees and usage restrictions. I personally decided I was tired of this behaviour when they made a crappy copy of FLAC and even stole the name (they just took out the "Free" and replaced it with "Apple", how appropriate) instead of just using it as-is. There's plenty of other examples.
- yardie 16y ago
  I'm referring to you saying that Apple should drop years of development and investment in their proprietary protocol for someone else's. And still doesn't support DRM. DLNA is great if you own all your media and have taken the time to encode it but fails miserably once you get into online purchases and rentals. FLAC, ALAC who cares. They both do what it says on the tin Lossless Audio Codec. Apple does what Apple does and the world can certainly support more than one type of system. They go off and do their own thing and have been punished and rewarded for it.
- yardie 16y ago
  I'm referring to you saying that Apple should drop years of development and investment in their proprietary protocol for someone else's. And still doesn't support DRM. DLNA is great if you own all your media and have taken the time to encode it but fails miserably once you get into online purchases and rentals. FLAC, ALAC who cares. They both do what it says on the tin Lossless Audio Codec. Apple does what Apple does and the world can certainly support more than one type of system. They go off and do their own thing and have been punished and rewarded for it.

by yardie 16y ago

So your saying that Apple should simply drop a protocol they invented in 2004 for one that came wasn't developed until 2006 and didn't gain any traction until 2010?

ZeroGravitas 16y ago

It's not obvious what you're referring to, but the answer's "yes", Apple should be working with others instead of re-inventing square wheels that happen to fit only their car and come with licence fees and usage restrictions. I personally decided I was tired of this behaviour when they made a crappy copy of FLAC and even stole the name (they just took out the "Free" and replaced it with "Apple", how appropriate) instead of just using it as-is. There's plenty of other examples.

yardie 16y ago
I'm referring to you saying that Apple should drop years of development and investment in their proprietary protocol for someone else's. And still doesn't support DRM. DLNA is great if you own all your media and have taken the time to encode it but fails miserably once you get into online purchases and rentals. FLAC, ALAC who cares. They both do what it says on the tin Lossless Audio Codec. Apple does what Apple does and the world can certainly support more than one type of system. They go off and do their own thing and have been punished and rewarded for it.
yardie 16y ago
I'm referring to you saying that Apple should drop years of development and investment in their proprietary protocol for someone else's. And still doesn't support DRM. DLNA is great if you own all your media and have taken the time to encode it but fails miserably once you get into online purchases and rentals. FLAC, ALAC who cares. They both do what it says on the tin Lossless Audio Codec. Apple does what Apple does and the world can certainly support more than one type of system. They go off and do their own thing and have been punished and rewarded for it.