3 ms·

What’s inconvenient about ordering an external drive from Amazon? It’s cheaper than Apple’s drive, anyway, and you can do it right now. There won’t be third par

• fpgeek 15y ago
  I think you misunderstand me, so I'll try to clarify. I'm not saying that ordering a third-party drive from Amazon is some insurmountable obstacle, I'm saying it is a small inconvenience that will result in a measurable difference in behavior because defaults matter (often much more than we think - see the studies on opt-in vs opt-out 401(k) enrollment). I'm also not arguing that there will be a smaller selection of ripped movies on bittorrent or whatever. I'm arguing people will use ripped movies less and, in particular, will use rips of their own collections less (and even watch their own collections less on their computer, but I think that effect is less interesting) because the optical drive is less convenient: - they're less likely to have it at all (as argued above) - it might not be at hand when you want to use it (particularly if you're not at home) - using an external drive is flat-out physically less convenient than an internal one (particularly if you need to keep your drive and computer plugged in and/or have other peripherals in the mix...) Why would it matter that people are ripping their own collections less? Because the norms around ripping your own collection come from CD ripping and the norms around downloading movies from bittorrent come from piracy. Many more people are willing to do the former than the latter. In other words, ripping your own collection is very useful and is fundamentally different from pirating. The convenience of ripping DVDs you own is an important factor that will affect people's video consumption and I think that effect is growing with time. I'm also not claiming that there is a complex conspiracy going on. I'm saying that, from a consumer's perspective, Apple's judgment about whether or not "the optical drive is done" is compromised. For that matter, this compromised judgment may manifest itself consciously or unconsciously. Apple decision-makers might unconsciously make any or all of the following mistakes (as well as others): - underestimating the usability of DVD rips - overestimating the usability of iTunes video by not considering niche drawbacks (e.g. subtitle issues) - underestimating the desire of people to have video on non-Apple devices (e.g. Android phones or tablets) To put it another way: Even though Apple has better technical judgment overall, I'm more willing to trust Lenovo or Dell's judgment about whether or not "the optical drive is done" because they don't face the same conflicts of interest that Apple does.
  • ugh 15y ago
    Who rips movies? That’s even nerdier than ripping CDs which also hardly anyone does. It doesn’t matter. Pirating has to be far more prevalent than ripping movies. I’m not sure what all that judgment talk of yours is about. Optical drives are done for me personally. I have no use whatsoever for an internal optical drive and I actually can’t think of anyone I know who would really need one. I will certainly never ever again buy a PC with an internal optical drive. That has nothing to do with Apple’s choices. It’s my personal choice and I will be very happy if Apple will sell me a product that fits my personal choice. If not I will have to buy something else. What do I care for Apple’s reasons? (I don’t think they are absurd like you paint them.)
    • fpgeek 15y ago
      I happen to care more about DVD ripping because I like it and I think it is going to become bigger, but most of my argument also holds if you're talking about watching DVDs on your laptop or desktop instead (which is completely mainstream). That being said, where did you get the idea that ripping CDs is nerdy? Where do you think the legions of iPods Apple has sold have gotten the overwhelming majority of their music? iTunes took plenty of time to get to where it is today and ripping was where (most of) the rest of the iPod music came from. To take a personal example, my wife has had an iPod for almost 6 years. Her iTunes Library is at least 80% ripped (maybe even 90%) despite the fact that she buys plenty of music from iTunes. Why? She had a substantial CD collection she ripped to start with. She also didn't stop buying CDs (things that you can't get on iTunes, autographed CDs or special attributes, new or used CDs on sale for less than they'd be on iTunes, ...). I'm also not claiming that Apple's reasons are absurd. I'm just saying that they have structural and institutional biases that might lead them to come to an incorrect conclusion about this particular point: the value of an optical drive. In other words, even though Apple has a pretty good batting average on these sorts of choices, there are reasons to think they might be wrong (in terms of what people will actually value) in this specific case.