14 ms·

Apple Deleted Rivals’ Songs from Users’ iPods

296 points by kenjackson 12y ago

na85 12y ago
>Augustin Farrugia testified that Apple did not offer a more detailed explanation because, “We don’t need to give users too much information,” and “We don’t want to confuse users.” A very revealing statement about the way Apple perceives its users. Shut up, pay, and don't ask questions.
- brandonbloom 12y ago
  A very revealing statement about your biases. As somebody who has had to do tech support, I fully understand the desire to provide the users with less information. Believe me, most of them confuse easily.
  - taspeotis 12y ago
    Also, a lot of users don't give a shit about how something happens (all the gritty details). They just want to understand what is happening. Most of the time this is because they have better things to do. When it comes to documentation: if the implementation details are not important to the user, you should skip them. Words on a page that a user reads but doesn't care about is wasting their time and they could be reading about other important details. If you have a broad user base who largely don't care about implementation details you're better hiding them from everyone rather than showing them to everyone.
  - pyre 12y ago
    The flip side of that is being completely opaque, and pushing all responsibility on the user. E.g. ISPs terminating large, encrypted file transfers and then playing dumb when a user tries to call them on it, "it must be a problem on your end.'
    - ajcarpy2005 12y ago
      What are the chances that the person you spoke to had any knowledge of the action you are talking about? EDIT: For that matter, how do you KNOW that the ISP did indeed terminate your large encrypted file transfer?
      - pyre 12y ago
        > What are the chances that the person you spoke to had any knowledge of the action you are talking about? Little to none, but this is by design. If they had made such a decision, tracing it to them is difficult. Easier to tell the phone reps nothing and push the blame onto either end of the transfer rather than on the path in-between. How many people will pursue this past just venting about it on the Internet? > For that matter, how do you KNOW that the ISP did indeed terminate your large encrypted file transfer? If it's a single transfer, then you really can't. That said, you can establish a pattern. For example, if your connections always terminate around the 20-minute mark and this happens regardless of the other end of the connection (or the network path to that end-point), you could make a compelling case that it's the ISP's fault at the very least.
  - anigbrowl 12y ago
    As someone who has also had to do tech support, I have hated Apple for this ever since, because it limits the user's ability to provide me with any information. 'An error has occurred.' Thanks Apple, real informative. I always admired the technology and integration in Apple gear, but since the days of MacOS system software I have always hated the dumbed-down, hard-to-customize operating system, and have never purchased an Apple product. I'm going to have to pick up an iPad at some point because there are so many good apps aimed at Musicians, and I respect the fact that OS X is basically BSD in gift wrap so I can get to a command line if I really want to know what's going on. But I don't feel that enthusiastic about it, because I think there's something fundamentally user-hostile about obfuscating what's going on behind the curtain.
    - TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
      Apple's error messages are often no better than what UNIX system utilities give you, to be fair.
      - spacemanmatt 12y ago
        ...both of which I feed directly to Google to gain enlightenment. It's almost like no one needs to bother catching an exception ever again!
    - sitharus 12y ago
      As a software developer and ex-linux user (it's still crap on the desktop) it's quite clear Apple have segmented their user base. Out of the box it's quite simple, but get a (free) developer account and install Xcode and you have the full power of the BSD system right there, but with a windowing system that doesn't crap out when you plug in a new monitor. Unfortunately it is rather opinionated and you do have to do things 'the mac way', but if you live in a Terminal having copy on a different key to interrupt is amazingly useful. Also having windows auto-restore when plugging in an external monitor, I only just learnt that Windows doesn't do this. As for errors, almost everything is logged in some way, but again it's hidden from regular users.
- spacemanmatt 12y ago
  I find Apple highly culpable for many things, but I won't fault them for defining their public interface their way. At some point private implementation details are just that.
aikah 12y ago
hmm, I dont understand.Afaik Ipods were synced with Itunes,seems to me that one could put anything on Itunes,no matter where it came from.So if I synced my Ipod against my Itunes database,all songs should have been on the Ipod. Did Itunes used to work differently?
- slimsag 12y ago
  I don't really understand how they differentiated either. My assumption would be that they somehow determined if a song or album came from another media service through, for example: - Some file metadata (somehow). - Or perhaps by looking at what programs you had installed on your PC.
  - jpttsn 12y ago
    The OP is sort of hiding that this was related to a DRM issue.
- nemothekid 12y ago
  That's how I remember it as well. You either had to load your music in via iTunes or buy it on the store. Any other way could wasn't very user friendly. (I'm assuming the suit is about 3rd party software attempting to directly sync with iPods, rather than use iTunes)
- xsmasher 12y ago
  I think they're referring to this: https://gigaom.com/2006/10/02/dvd-jon-fairplays-apple/ https://gigaom.com/2006/10/02/dvd-jon-fairplays-apple/ Apple DID let you sync raw MP3 and other non-DRM files, but only through iTunes. Apple did not delete those to my knowledge, but it sounds like the allegation is that Apple deleted DRM'd files that were side-loaded through other programs like DVD Jon's Doubletwist.
- adnrw 12y ago
  You needed iTunes to act as a conduit to get songs onto the iPod, but you could either sync it with one iTunes library, or leave it in manual mode and load songs from any iTunes. It worked then exactly the same way as it does now[1]. You couldn't sync songs on the device back into iTunes though[2] - if you had it in manual, put some songs on it (from another iTunes library, a third party app or anywhere else) and then tried to sync it with your iTunes, it would remove everything on there before syncing over your iTunes library. 1: http://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201593 http://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201593 2: Without one of many third-party helper apps. Sentuti was a lifesaver!
oofabz 12y ago
>Updates that deleted non-Apple music files were intended to protect consumers from those system break-ins. How convenient that Apple chose a security solution that just happened to give them an unfair advantage over their competition. Quite the happy coincidence there.
- intopieces 12y ago
  If their intention was to stifle the competition, it seems logical that they would have prevented the device from accepting music ripped from CDs or music downloaded illegally. Alas, they did not do this, because the success of the ipod was predicated on widespread copyright infringement. Who would pay 350$+ for a music player if they had to pay for all the music too? No, this was a simple case of keeping the record companies happy with the DRM scheme. Remember, when the iPod and other players hit the market, the record companies wanted to sue them for facilitating music theft. Same thing happened with writable CDs. The consumer was not harmed.
  - lmm 12y ago
    The intention was to stifle the competition in the moneymaking part of the business. IIRC at one point Real were like "name your price" for a license for the DRM technology, and were told it was not for sale.
- jpttsn 12y ago
  You're right that that's probably not a genuine reason. Apple likely tried to get an advantage over their competition. However I'd argue it's a fair advantage. Apple are not obliged to make competitors' DRM work with their devices.
jchimney 12y ago
Not cool. I love my apple products and ecosystem; but an effort should be made to identify and reimburse.
pervycreeper 12y ago
>Farrugia told the court that hackers with names like “DVD Jon” and “Requiem” made Apple “very paranoid” about protecting iTunes. Updates that deleted non-Apple music files were intended to protect consumers from those system break-ins. Deleting DRMed media files and system software somehow solves system intrusions? That's rich. Pretty clear who the bad guys are here.
- jpttsn 12y ago
  You're assuming that when two companies have a fight, one of them is a good and the other is a bad guy? They can't both be bad?
  - pervycreeper 12y ago
    I was thinking more about the consumer who might wish to use the files he/she purchased.
rnovak 12y ago
They still do the same type of thing. Glad I paid 930 dollars for a device I can only use with music from their store from one computer. edit: Those downvoting seem to be seriously hostile towards consumers. If people are giving you 700 dollar profits per sale, I think you should be a lot more upfront about your limitations. Hiding a disclaimer in fine print on a support page is just plain wrong.
- SG- 12y ago
  Ok, but you're completely wrong. It can play any mp3 or aac that doesn't have any DRM weather it's from Amazon, some other store or pirated.
  - rnovak 12y ago
    Well, firstly, I believe Amazon music is DRM locked, the only way you can download it on an iPhone/iTouch is through their 'app', and you cant export it. Secondly, yah, that's true, if you only use one computer. If you're like any one of the millions of people who use more than one computer, the second you plug your iPhone/iTouch into a different computer, the only options you're given are to 1) Eject or 2) Erase. Considering what I spent on the iPhone, I should be able to do whatever I please, but that's clearly not the case.
    - SG- 12y ago
      I don't know if Amazon even uses DRM but if they do, how is that an Apple issue? Apple doesn't even use DRM for it's purchased content anymore. While I'm sure a small portion of the population has more than computer, I don't see why you'd need to sync your music on more than one. All the other data can be sync'd through iCloud (contacts, etc). Do you also see why that restriction might be in place? They don't want to let people plug it into anyone's computer and "share" all that music. I suppose with iCloud Drive now part of OSX you can just sync keep your music or iTunes folder in there and sync that.
      - rnovak 12y ago
shurcooL 12y ago
Apple deleted all my songs that were _legally_ purchased from _iTunes_. What did I do deserve that? I bought a new iPad. So what happened is that I was living in Canada. I bought a bunch (maybe 30-50) songs directly from iTunes over the years. I had them on my iPad mini. Later on, I was working and living in US, so I changed the country to US and added a US credit card to my iTunes account. Everything was fine. Then, the iPad mini with Retina display (aka iPad mini 2) came out and I wanted to upgrade to it. Normally, I have nightly backups to iCloud, but since they are (unfortunately) not as thorough, I made a full local backup to my MacBook, and restored it on the new iPad mini with Retina. All the apps and settings transferred fine, but all songs were missing. When I went to "iTunes Song Purchases", it was empty, as it doesn't consider purchases I made in the Canadian iTunes Store as purchases. I know that if I remembered/knew which songs I bought, I could buy them again and it might not charge me a 2nd time, but it's like playing russian roulette - you have to confirm a purchase and if it matches, you don't pay, else you do. Plus it's a lot of work to find/remember which songs I bought. At first I was pretty unhappy about it and was gonna try to do something, but then I just gave up on it and moved on. It's not completely Apple's fault, because they have to deal with countries and having separate stores. I wish there was one global store and 1 country and 1 currency and I wouldn't have to deal with this just because I moved to new coordinates, but yeah.
- wodenokoto 12y ago
  I'm pretty sure if you log into the Canadian account again there will be a list of past purchases. At least there is for apps
  - mcphage 12y ago
    I suspect that this is what happened—they need to log into their Canadian account, which they somehow got logged out of.
    - Major_Grooves 12y ago
      It's the same account - he changed what country his account applied to because he now has a US card. There is no Canadian account to log-in to. I guess if he tried the reverse he could lose his US purchases.
acomjean 12y ago
So I've bought music from itunes and amazon. The amazon program, downloads the music, opens itunes and through some scripting magic (applescript) adds those songs to itunes which then auto sync to my ipod. Amazingly seamless. Requiem was a drm stripper for itunes music and videos. It was a clear that apple figured out what was going on and made software updates to break it. Once apple beat it for good I stopped buying videos (and pretty much stopped watching tv). Now music is DRM free. Video, saddly is not.
- josefresco 12y ago
  I too started by purchasing MP3's from Amazon because f*ck DRM. However once Apple ditched the DRM, I started buying from iTunes, and rather like it's ability to "sync" music purchased on another iOS device to the device I'm currently using (I have a family with 5 iOS devices). I tend to purchase most songs while in my car (after hearing it on Pandora/Sirius) and don't know if it would even be possible to purchase and play immediately a track purchased from Amazon on an iOS device (without a computer).
  - leviathant 12y ago
    I switched to Amazon once they started doing digital music sales. You can purchase and immediately play music from Amazon on iOS devices, without a computer, using the Amazon Music app. By default, the music streams from Amazon, but you can also download it to your device. In fact, I can stream/download music from CDs and vinyl I bought years ago through Amazon.
beefsack 12y ago
The past couple of years I've gone back to buying physical CDs and ripping them myself (abcde is fantastic) in the quality and format I like. My music collection is synced to Dropbox and automatically syncs across all my PCs and to my phone. I've also come to enjoy walking into music stores and browsing the music looking for something that I'll enjoy coding to, and a lot of the time here in Australia it ends up being cheaper buying physical CDs nowadays, especially if you're not buying the latest stuff. There's more than just convenience.
- Spearchucker 12y ago
  I do the same thing. I bought music from Amazon for a while. Every now and again I bought some German music from Amazon.de. The purchase works well enough but after that none of my non-German music works in the Amazon player. The Xbox One will simply not let me purchase anything that's not from my region. The CD or DVD just takes all that pain away.
  - mandalar12 12y ago
    Why not just use Amazon or Google music and download everything ? Google Music is especially good because it lets you download a .zip with complete album compared to Amazon that only lets you download one song at a time. I used to buy and rip CDs but it takes time and space and feels really backward.
    - Spearchucker 12y ago
      I have a wall bookshelf which has a corner-to-corner shelf in it for CDs, and another for DVDs. That makes the bookshelf more interesting and gives an otherwise really cold-looking room warmth, without taking up space. As mentioned, Amazon makes it frustrating to buy digital content from another region (although it does work). Google is not an option because I'm one of those people that avoids anything Google, no matter how convenient their products may be. All of this is very subjective. Your points are well made, nonetheless.
  - Semaphor 12y ago
kijin 12y ago
Whenever I buy a song on iTunes (or any other online store), I immediately convert it to mp3, and move the mp3 to another folder that iTunes doesn't know about. Then I shut down that proprietary pile of cow dung and play, sync, etc. the song in any way I like, using any program I like, on any device I like. It's a bit of hassle, but in exchange, I actually get to feel like I own those files. I think I started doing this shortly after Amazon got into a minor shitstorm for remotely deleting copies of 1984 (of all books!) from Kindle devices. News like this makes me happy that I've been doing what I've been doing.
- mmastrac 12y ago
  If you're getting lossless files, you should probably be converting them to FLAC. You might (read: will) take a small hit on quality going from AAC to MP3.
  - kijin 12y ago
    I still have some stone-age devices that can't handle FLAC, and my mediocre ears can't hear the difference anyway.
- mightykan 12y ago
  The AAC files that you get from iTunes are DRM free so you shouldn't need to convert to MP3 and take a small hit in quality. Most devices _should_ be able to play the .m4a files.
Yetanfou 12y ago
Every time a story like this comes along, a whole host of commenters tries to absolve Apple (or ${insert_other_company}, although the phenomenon seems to be especially prevalent when Apple is mentioned) from any wrongdoings, whether perceived or real. Why is this? It bears a remarkable parallel to the same behaviour often seen in discussions involving religion. An honest question to those of you who feel the urge to defend your favourite company from all accusations, what makes you do so? It is not as if these commercial entities have any loyalty to you, so why stand up for them?
- snarfy 12y ago
  I read a study (sorry no link) that says when people with irrational beliefs are presented with evidence to the contrary, it strengthens their beliefs.
- jpttsn 12y ago
  Something makes people stand up against what they think are unfair accusations. Otherwise trial by jury etc. wouldn't work.
- shurcooL 12y ago
  It depends on the difference between perceived rating by others vs your own. If you come in and see 10 people attacking Apple, you might start defending it. "It's not _that_ bad!" If you see 10 people saying Apple is completely innocent, you will try to convince people Apple is somewhat at fault.
- Spearchucker 12y ago
  It's about consistency. Consistency is our nearly obsessive desire to be (and appear to be) consistent with what we have already done (buying an iPhone, for example). Once we've made that choice, we encounter personal and interpersonal pressures to behave consistently with that commitment. If you're interested in this sort of behaviour, you might try Robert Cialdini's book, Influence, the Phychology of Persuasion (http://www.amazon.com/dp/006124189X/ http://www.amazon.com/dp/006124189X/). [Edit] I'm an idiot. I forgot that I wrote a post about this a while ago - here's a summary of Cialdini's (and related) stuff: https://www.wittenburg.co.uk/Entry.aspx?id=439dc4d5-33db-45a3-9c32-176ad141b86f https://www.wittenburg.co.uk/Entry.aspx?id=439dc4d5-33db-45a.... It's about influence, and to that end discusses some of our behavioural traits.
72deluxe 12y ago
CDs do not have this problem. That's why I still buy them, despite the "pain" of ripping a CD (it'll be a problem if I ever move to a skinny MacBook and have no CD drive anymore - how will I share CDs of music I have recorded with the drummer...?) Plus, to take the songs from you, they'd have to break into my house and walk away with all my CDs. I also have interesting sleeve notes and details on who mixed the album and the equipment they endorse, as well as photos and beautiful smelling paper in the sleeves. Great!
- Cthulhu_ 12y ago
  > how will I share CDs of music I have recorded with the drummer...? External / USB DVD drive, or an USB stick, or Dropbox, or Mega, or some other service like that.
  - 72deluxe 12y ago
    Sadly my drummer isn't as technical-savvy as us on here. He lives out in the country and has a poor Internet connection, plus downloading file and writing an MP3 to disc as audio would probably be beyond him - he is in his mid-50s. The external DVD drive offered by Apple seems prohibitively expensive for what it is; also, carrying an external drive around to save just a few millimetres on MacBook height seems stupid to me.
- Perseids 12y ago
  Plus, for the majority of recordings it is the only way to get lossless copies. And to reply to the usual criticism in advance: No I don't hear the difference between 320kbit MP3 and lossless, but I want to be future proof for the time some advanced codec like Opus finally takes over. For some reasons, storage space on portable players has stopped to grow at the 8 or 16GB mark, while SD cards go well into 128GB by now (with affordable prices). Thus, like 8 years ago, a factor of 2 or 3 in the compression ratio still makes the difference between me carefully having to choose which of my music I want to copy on my player or just dumping the whole library on it.
- jisaacks 12y ago
  The main reason I prefer purchasing on iTunes vs physical CDs is that I do not have to purchase an entire album to get the one song I like. I know there are singles CDs, but usually just for certain hit songs.
Htsthbjig 12y ago
How is that a problem? The official way to upload Songs in the Ipod-Iphone is using Itunes. I have uploaded myself lots of music purchased on other services or my own into Itunes without a problem. It will be a problem if Itunes restricted the music it loads in the devices, like the misleading tittle implies, and like other devices did(and are History now),it does not. I have also uploaded music from Linux programs, caring not to update the firmware of the device over the supported ones, but I would not have made a drama if it were not to work.
fit2rule 12y ago
I've stopped buying music from musicians I can't contact directly and communicate with, without having a middleman/record-company in the mix. Its not hard to find great, quality music, made by real people out there in the music world. So much great stuff goes unnoticed because people are distracted by the majors, but I think the industry has changed. There's nothing quite so rewarding as listening to a great album, then mailing the artist and paying them directly, and getting a response from them personally.. The record companies don't offer anything near this level of personal contact and I think its changing everything.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- goblin89 12y ago
  > There's nothing quite so rewarding as listening to a great album, then mailing the artist and paying them directly, and getting a response from them personally. Bandcamp seems to be doing about the right thing, actually. It allows to keep the interaction between artist and listener reasonably personal, while at the same time offering options to make the process easier and more streamlined from artist’s perspective. It also is very transparent about their fees—you know your money will go directly to the artist (though I’m not totally sure how it works with labels, for them Bandcamp seems to offer a separate kind of account).
kefka 12y ago
Your first problem: You bought Apple. Your second problem: you expected a bad actor to suddenly be good. Your third problem. You kept buying Apple because it's 'shiny'. Guess you should have listened to Stallman. He may be a nut, but he does call it right.
- spacemanmatt 12y ago
  He's nutty, not a nut. Subtle but important difference. His calls are amazingly far-reaching. But yes, he can call 'em. The trouble is, his Al Gore beats his delivery. They both gotta up their PR game.
  - kefka 12y ago
    Good point. He is nutty, but still is right on. I work in Emergent technology/ R&D at a university, and we get questions like "what can I buy that will just work"? I look towards Free Software, and what is published. If there's a free software solution for it, it'll never go away. However, if there's a loose corporate control, then it probably will fade. But if there's iron-grip control, the device will go away as soon as something shiner comes out to take its place. That last one is Apple.
josefresco 12y ago
I'm curious to hear more about the meaning of "The system was totally hacked". "Farrugia told the court that hackers with names like “DVD Jon” and “Requiem” made Apple “very paranoid” about protecting iTunes. Updates that deleted non-Apple music files were intended to protect consumers from those system break-ins. “The system was totally hacked,” he said." Is he stating that the iPhone OS (was it called iOS back then?) was completely hacked, or that the work-around to get music onto an iPod outside of iTunes was "hacked"? I'm assuming the former, just curious on the background there.
fixermark 12y ago
It's interesting that I don't hear these stories from the Android or Windows Phone ecosystems. I think this might be a situation where Apple being first-mover has been a disadvantage to them; they started with a "sync to one single computer" design, and have been patching on that over and over to move into the new ecosystems. The other options in the market started with a "sync to cloud" design, so they had to solve issues of merging and collating data from multiple devices out of the starting gate.
- mcphage 12y ago
  > I think this might be a situation where Apple being first-mover has been a disadvantage to them Also, when Android started, music was only sold without DRM. And incompatible flavors of DRM is what this whole thing is about. Windows Phone was around then, but I don't know much about music on it.
arca_vorago 12y ago
It's part of the move away from ownership and towards leasing and licensing of everything. Because there is much more profit there. I started out as a BSD guy, who transitioned as the *nix desktop got better to gnu/linux. The more I learned about the differences between gpl/bsd and the more I thought about the philosophical underpinnings, the more I am convinced that Richard Stallman, while eccentric and sometimes hard to bear for some, was and is a man ahead of his time, and that he is absolutely right when he talks about the four freedoms. Despite this, at my recent new position, I gave in and decided to dive into the apple ecosystem because "spend less time fixing your system and more time working!" was what I kept getting told. I also have apple users so the ability to support them is important. That being said, I have been increasingly dissatisfied with the whole system, both in it's functionality and its philosophy. (which is a whole post within itself) I'm about ready to scrap it all and return to something I have more control over. The bottom line is this: If you don't have root on your device, you don't own it. (iPhone, iPod, iPad, Android phone, Windows phone, Smart TV's, gaming consoles, we are increasingly surrounded by devices we don't have control over. I was listening to a talk about why bsd is a better ecosystem, and it is, in many ways, and the presenter said something that really struck me. He said, paraphrasing, "...and we recently found out [whichever]bsd is in the playstation 4." He said it in a way that was supposed to be impressive, as in "hey look, our shit is so awesome and business friendly that it got put on the new playstation!" An audience member then said something along the lines of, "is the source code released?" And of course the speaker had to mumble "no" and move on quickly. It's the epitome of the problem. BSD licensing enables companies to restrict the freedom of the user, full stop. I truly believe GPL is just getting started in the future of science, technology, and communication.

296 points by kenjackson 12y ago

na85 12y ago

>Augustin Farrugia testified that Apple did not offer a more detailed explanation because, “We don’t need to give users too much information,” and “We don’t want to confuse users.” A very revealing statement about the way Apple perceives its users. Shut up, pay, and don't ask questions.

brandonbloom 12y ago
A very revealing statement about your biases. As somebody who has had to do tech support, I fully understand the desire to provide the users with less information. Believe me, most of them confuse easily.
- taspeotis 12y ago
  Also, a lot of users don't give a shit about how something happens (all the gritty details). They just want to understand what is happening. Most of the time this is because they have better things to do. When it comes to documentation: if the implementation details are not important to the user, you should skip them. Words on a page that a user reads but doesn't care about is wasting their time and they could be reading about other important details. If you have a broad user base who largely don't care about implementation details you're better hiding them from everyone rather than showing them to everyone.
- pyre 12y ago
  The flip side of that is being completely opaque, and pushing all responsibility on the user. E.g. ISPs terminating large, encrypted file transfers and then playing dumb when a user tries to call them on it, "it must be a problem on your end.'
  - ajcarpy2005 12y ago
    What are the chances that the person you spoke to had any knowledge of the action you are talking about? EDIT: For that matter, how do you KNOW that the ISP did indeed terminate your large encrypted file transfer?
    - pyre 12y ago
      > What are the chances that the person you spoke to had any knowledge of the action you are talking about? Little to none, but this is by design. If they had made such a decision, tracing it to them is difficult. Easier to tell the phone reps nothing and push the blame onto either end of the transfer rather than on the path in-between. How many people will pursue this past just venting about it on the Internet? > For that matter, how do you KNOW that the ISP did indeed terminate your large encrypted file transfer? If it's a single transfer, then you really can't. That said, you can establish a pattern. For example, if your connections always terminate around the 20-minute mark and this happens regardless of the other end of the connection (or the network path to that end-point), you could make a compelling case that it's the ISP's fault at the very least.
- anigbrowl 12y ago
  As someone who has also had to do tech support, I have hated Apple for this ever since, because it limits the user's ability to provide me with any information. 'An error has occurred.' Thanks Apple, real informative. I always admired the technology and integration in Apple gear, but since the days of MacOS system software I have always hated the dumbed-down, hard-to-customize operating system, and have never purchased an Apple product. I'm going to have to pick up an iPad at some point because there are so many good apps aimed at Musicians, and I respect the fact that OS X is basically BSD in gift wrap so I can get to a command line if I really want to know what's going on. But I don't feel that enthusiastic about it, because I think there's something fundamentally user-hostile about obfuscating what's going on behind the curtain.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
    Apple's error messages are often no better than what UNIX system utilities give you, to be fair.
    - spacemanmatt 12y ago
      ...both of which I feed directly to Google to gain enlightenment. It's almost like no one needs to bother catching an exception ever again!
  - sitharus 12y ago
    As a software developer and ex-linux user (it's still crap on the desktop) it's quite clear Apple have segmented their user base. Out of the box it's quite simple, but get a (free) developer account and install Xcode and you have the full power of the BSD system right there, but with a windowing system that doesn't crap out when you plug in a new monitor. Unfortunately it is rather opinionated and you do have to do things 'the mac way', but if you live in a Terminal having copy on a different key to interrupt is amazingly useful. Also having windows auto-restore when plugging in an external monitor, I only just learnt that Windows doesn't do this. As for errors, almost everything is logged in some way, but again it's hidden from regular users.
spacemanmatt 12y ago
I find Apple highly culpable for many things, but I won't fault them for defining their public interface their way. At some point private implementation details are just that.

aikah 12y ago

hmm, I dont understand.Afaik Ipods were synced with Itunes,seems to me that one could put anything on Itunes,no matter where it came from.So if I synced my Ipod against my Itunes database,all songs should have been on the Ipod. Did Itunes used to work differently?

slimsag 12y ago
I don't really understand how they differentiated either. My assumption would be that they somehow determined if a song or album came from another media service through, for example: - Some file metadata (somehow). - Or perhaps by looking at what programs you had installed on your PC.
- jpttsn 12y ago
  The OP is sort of hiding that this was related to a DRM issue.
nemothekid 12y ago
That's how I remember it as well. You either had to load your music in via iTunes or buy it on the store. Any other way could wasn't very user friendly. (I'm assuming the suit is about 3rd party software attempting to directly sync with iPods, rather than use iTunes)
xsmasher 12y ago
I think they're referring to this: https://gigaom.com/2006/10/02/dvd-jon-fairplays-apple/ https://gigaom.com/2006/10/02/dvd-jon-fairplays-apple/ Apple DID let you sync raw MP3 and other non-DRM files, but only through iTunes. Apple did not delete those to my knowledge, but it sounds like the allegation is that Apple deleted DRM'd files that were side-loaded through other programs like DVD Jon's Doubletwist.
adnrw 12y ago
You needed iTunes to act as a conduit to get songs onto the iPod, but you could either sync it with one iTunes library, or leave it in manual mode and load songs from any iTunes. It worked then exactly the same way as it does now[1]. You couldn't sync songs on the device back into iTunes though[2] - if you had it in manual, put some songs on it (from another iTunes library, a third party app or anywhere else) and then tried to sync it with your iTunes, it would remove everything on there before syncing over your iTunes library. 1: http://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201593 http://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201593 2: Without one of many third-party helper apps. Sentuti was a lifesaver!

oofabz 12y ago

>Updates that deleted non-Apple music files were intended to protect consumers from those system break-ins. How convenient that Apple chose a security solution that just happened to give them an unfair advantage over their competition. Quite the happy coincidence there.

intopieces 12y ago
If their intention was to stifle the competition, it seems logical that they would have prevented the device from accepting music ripped from CDs or music downloaded illegally. Alas, they did not do this, because the success of the ipod was predicated on widespread copyright infringement. Who would pay 350$+ for a music player if they had to pay for all the music too? No, this was a simple case of keeping the record companies happy with the DRM scheme. Remember, when the iPod and other players hit the market, the record companies wanted to sue them for facilitating music theft. Same thing happened with writable CDs. The consumer was not harmed.
- lmm 12y ago
  The intention was to stifle the competition in the moneymaking part of the business. IIRC at one point Real were like "name your price" for a license for the DRM technology, and were told it was not for sale.
jpttsn 12y ago
You're right that that's probably not a genuine reason. Apple likely tried to get an advantage over their competition. However I'd argue it's a fair advantage. Apple are not obliged to make competitors' DRM work with their devices.

jchimney 12y ago

Not cool. I love my apple products and ecosystem; but an effort should be made to identify and reimburse.

pervycreeper 12y ago

>Farrugia told the court that hackers with names like “DVD Jon” and “Requiem” made Apple “very paranoid” about protecting iTunes. Updates that deleted non-Apple music files were intended to protect consumers from those system break-ins. Deleting DRMed media files and system software somehow solves system intrusions? That's rich. Pretty clear who the bad guys are here.

jpttsn 12y ago
You're assuming that when two companies have a fight, one of them is a good and the other is a bad guy? They can't both be bad?
- pervycreeper 12y ago
  I was thinking more about the consumer who might wish to use the files he/she purchased.

rnovak 12y ago

They still do the same type of thing. Glad I paid 930 dollars for a device I can only use with music from their store from one computer. edit: Those downvoting seem to be seriously hostile towards consumers. If people are giving you 700 dollar profits per sale, I think you should be a lot more upfront about your limitations. Hiding a disclaimer in fine print on a support page is just plain wrong.

SG- 12y ago
Ok, but you're completely wrong. It can play any mp3 or aac that doesn't have any DRM weather it's from Amazon, some other store or pirated.
- rnovak 12y ago
  Well, firstly, I believe Amazon music is DRM locked, the only way you can download it on an iPhone/iTouch is through their 'app', and you cant export it. Secondly, yah, that's true, if you only use one computer. If you're like any one of the millions of people who use more than one computer, the second you plug your iPhone/iTouch into a different computer, the only options you're given are to 1) Eject or 2) Erase. Considering what I spent on the iPhone, I should be able to do whatever I please, but that's clearly not the case.
  - SG- 12y ago
    I don't know if Amazon even uses DRM but if they do, how is that an Apple issue? Apple doesn't even use DRM for it's purchased content anymore. While I'm sure a small portion of the population has more than computer, I don't see why you'd need to sync your music on more than one. All the other data can be sync'd through iCloud (contacts, etc). Do you also see why that restriction might be in place? They don't want to let people plug it into anyone's computer and "share" all that music. I suppose with iCloud Drive now part of OSX you can just sync keep your music or iTunes folder in there and sync that.
    - rnovak 12y ago

shurcooL 12y ago

Apple deleted all my songs that were _legally_ purchased from _iTunes_. What did I do deserve that? I bought a new iPad. So what happened is that I was living in Canada. I bought a bunch (maybe 30-50) songs directly from iTunes over the years. I had them on my iPad mini. Later on, I was working and living in US, so I changed the country to US and added a US credit card to my iTunes account. Everything was fine. Then, the iPad mini with Retina display (aka iPad mini 2) came out and I wanted to upgrade to it. Normally, I have nightly backups to iCloud, but since they are (unfortunately) not as thorough, I made a full local backup to my MacBook, and restored it on the new iPad mini with Retina. All the apps and settings transferred fine, but all songs were missing. When I went to "iTunes Song Purchases", it was empty, as it doesn't consider purchases I made in the Canadian iTunes Store as purchases. I know that if I remembered/knew which songs I bought, I could buy them again and it might not charge me a 2nd time, but it's like playing russian roulette - you have to confirm a purchase and if it matches, you don't pay, else you do. Plus it's a lot of work to find/remember which songs I bought. At first I was pretty unhappy about it and was gonna try to do something, but then I just gave up on it and moved on. It's not completely Apple's fault, because they have to deal with countries and having separate stores. I wish there was one global store and 1 country and 1 currency and I wouldn't have to deal with this just because I moved to new coordinates, but yeah.

wodenokoto 12y ago
I'm pretty sure if you log into the Canadian account again there will be a list of past purchases. At least there is for apps
- mcphage 12y ago
  I suspect that this is what happened—they need to log into their Canadian account, which they somehow got logged out of.
  - Major_Grooves 12y ago
    It's the same account - he changed what country his account applied to because he now has a US card. There is no Canadian account to log-in to. I guess if he tried the reverse he could lose his US purchases.

acomjean 12y ago

So I've bought music from itunes and amazon. The amazon program, downloads the music, opens itunes and through some scripting magic (applescript) adds those songs to itunes which then auto sync to my ipod. Amazingly seamless. Requiem was a drm stripper for itunes music and videos. It was a clear that apple figured out what was going on and made software updates to break it. Once apple beat it for good I stopped buying videos (and pretty much stopped watching tv). Now music is DRM free. Video, saddly is not.

josefresco 12y ago
I too started by purchasing MP3's from Amazon because f*ck DRM. However once Apple ditched the DRM, I started buying from iTunes, and rather like it's ability to "sync" music purchased on another iOS device to the device I'm currently using (I have a family with 5 iOS devices). I tend to purchase most songs while in my car (after hearing it on Pandora/Sirius) and don't know if it would even be possible to purchase and play immediately a track purchased from Amazon on an iOS device (without a computer).
- leviathant 12y ago
  I switched to Amazon once they started doing digital music sales. You can purchase and immediately play music from Amazon on iOS devices, without a computer, using the Amazon Music app. By default, the music streams from Amazon, but you can also download it to your device. In fact, I can stream/download music from CDs and vinyl I bought years ago through Amazon.

beefsack 12y ago

The past couple of years I've gone back to buying physical CDs and ripping them myself (abcde is fantastic) in the quality and format I like. My music collection is synced to Dropbox and automatically syncs across all my PCs and to my phone. I've also come to enjoy walking into music stores and browsing the music looking for something that I'll enjoy coding to, and a lot of the time here in Australia it ends up being cheaper buying physical CDs nowadays, especially if you're not buying the latest stuff. There's more than just convenience.

Spearchucker 12y ago
I do the same thing. I bought music from Amazon for a while. Every now and again I bought some German music from Amazon.de. The purchase works well enough but after that none of my non-German music works in the Amazon player. The Xbox One will simply not let me purchase anything that's not from my region. The CD or DVD just takes all that pain away.
- mandalar12 12y ago
  Why not just use Amazon or Google music and download everything ? Google Music is especially good because it lets you download a .zip with complete album compared to Amazon that only lets you download one song at a time. I used to buy and rip CDs but it takes time and space and feels really backward.
  - Spearchucker 12y ago
    I have a wall bookshelf which has a corner-to-corner shelf in it for CDs, and another for DVDs. That makes the bookshelf more interesting and gives an otherwise really cold-looking room warmth, without taking up space. As mentioned, Amazon makes it frustrating to buy digital content from another region (although it does work). Google is not an option because I'm one of those people that avoids anything Google, no matter how convenient their products may be. All of this is very subjective. Your points are well made, nonetheless.
- Semaphor 12y ago

kijin 12y ago

Whenever I buy a song on iTunes (or any other online store), I immediately convert it to mp3, and move the mp3 to another folder that iTunes doesn't know about. Then I shut down that proprietary pile of cow dung and play, sync, etc. the song in any way I like, using any program I like, on any device I like. It's a bit of hassle, but in exchange, I actually get to feel like I own those files. I think I started doing this shortly after Amazon got into a minor shitstorm for remotely deleting copies of 1984 (of all books!) from Kindle devices. News like this makes me happy that I've been doing what I've been doing.

mmastrac 12y ago
If you're getting lossless files, you should probably be converting them to FLAC. You might (read: will) take a small hit on quality going from AAC to MP3.
- kijin 12y ago
  I still have some stone-age devices that can't handle FLAC, and my mediocre ears can't hear the difference anyway.
mightykan 12y ago
The AAC files that you get from iTunes are DRM free so you shouldn't need to convert to MP3 and take a small hit in quality. Most devices _should_ be able to play the .m4a files.

Yetanfou 12y ago

Every time a story like this comes along, a whole host of commenters tries to absolve Apple (or ${insert_other_company}, although the phenomenon seems to be especially prevalent when Apple is mentioned) from any wrongdoings, whether perceived or real. Why is this? It bears a remarkable parallel to the same behaviour often seen in discussions involving religion. An honest question to those of you who feel the urge to defend your favourite company from all accusations, what makes you do so? It is not as if these commercial entities have any loyalty to you, so why stand up for them?

snarfy 12y ago
I read a study (sorry no link) that says when people with irrational beliefs are presented with evidence to the contrary, it strengthens their beliefs.
jpttsn 12y ago
Something makes people stand up against what they think are unfair accusations. Otherwise trial by jury etc. wouldn't work.
shurcooL 12y ago
It depends on the difference between perceived rating by others vs your own. If you come in and see 10 people attacking Apple, you might start defending it. "It's not _that_ bad!" If you see 10 people saying Apple is completely innocent, you will try to convince people Apple is somewhat at fault.
Spearchucker 12y ago
It's about consistency. Consistency is our nearly obsessive desire to be (and appear to be) consistent with what we have already done (buying an iPhone, for example). Once we've made that choice, we encounter personal and interpersonal pressures to behave consistently with that commitment. If you're interested in this sort of behaviour, you might try Robert Cialdini's book, Influence, the Phychology of Persuasion (http://www.amazon.com/dp/006124189X/ http://www.amazon.com/dp/006124189X/). [Edit] I'm an idiot. I forgot that I wrote a post about this a while ago - here's a summary of Cialdini's (and related) stuff: https://www.wittenburg.co.uk/Entry.aspx?id=439dc4d5-33db-45a3-9c32-176ad141b86f https://www.wittenburg.co.uk/Entry.aspx?id=439dc4d5-33db-45a.... It's about influence, and to that end discusses some of our behavioural traits.

72deluxe 12y ago

CDs do not have this problem. That's why I still buy them, despite the "pain" of ripping a CD (it'll be a problem if I ever move to a skinny MacBook and have no CD drive anymore - how will I share CDs of music I have recorded with the drummer...?) Plus, to take the songs from you, they'd have to break into my house and walk away with all my CDs. I also have interesting sleeve notes and details on who mixed the album and the equipment they endorse, as well as photos and beautiful smelling paper in the sleeves. Great!

Cthulhu_ 12y ago
> how will I share CDs of music I have recorded with the drummer...? External / USB DVD drive, or an USB stick, or Dropbox, or Mega, or some other service like that.
- 72deluxe 12y ago
  Sadly my drummer isn't as technical-savvy as us on here. He lives out in the country and has a poor Internet connection, plus downloading file and writing an MP3 to disc as audio would probably be beyond him - he is in his mid-50s. The external DVD drive offered by Apple seems prohibitively expensive for what it is; also, carrying an external drive around to save just a few millimetres on MacBook height seems stupid to me.
Perseids 12y ago
Plus, for the majority of recordings it is the only way to get lossless copies. And to reply to the usual criticism in advance: No I don't hear the difference between 320kbit MP3 and lossless, but I want to be future proof for the time some advanced codec like Opus finally takes over. For some reasons, storage space on portable players has stopped to grow at the 8 or 16GB mark, while SD cards go well into 128GB by now (with affordable prices). Thus, like 8 years ago, a factor of 2 or 3 in the compression ratio still makes the difference between me carefully having to choose which of my music I want to copy on my player or just dumping the whole library on it.
jisaacks 12y ago
The main reason I prefer purchasing on iTunes vs physical CDs is that I do not have to purchase an entire album to get the one song I like. I know there are singles CDs, but usually just for certain hit songs.

Htsthbjig 12y ago

How is that a problem? The official way to upload Songs in the Ipod-Iphone is using Itunes. I have uploaded myself lots of music purchased on other services or my own into Itunes without a problem. It will be a problem if Itunes restricted the music it loads in the devices, like the misleading tittle implies, and like other devices did(and are History now),it does not. I have also uploaded music from Linux programs, caring not to update the firmware of the device over the supported ones, but I would not have made a drama if it were not to work.

fit2rule 12y ago

I've stopped buying music from musicians I can't contact directly and communicate with, without having a middleman/record-company in the mix. Its not hard to find great, quality music, made by real people out there in the music world. So much great stuff goes unnoticed because people are distracted by the majors, but I think the industry has changed. There's nothing quite so rewarding as listening to a great album, then mailing the artist and paying them directly, and getting a response from them personally.. The record companies don't offer anything near this level of personal contact and I think its changing everything.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
goblin89 12y ago
> There's nothing quite so rewarding as listening to a great album, then mailing the artist and paying them directly, and getting a response from them personally. Bandcamp seems to be doing about the right thing, actually. It allows to keep the interaction between artist and listener reasonably personal, while at the same time offering options to make the process easier and more streamlined from artist’s perspective. It also is very transparent about their fees—you know your money will go directly to the artist (though I’m not totally sure how it works with labels, for them Bandcamp seems to offer a separate kind of account).

kefka 12y ago

Your first problem: You bought Apple. Your second problem: you expected a bad actor to suddenly be good. Your third problem. You kept buying Apple because it's 'shiny'. Guess you should have listened to Stallman. He may be a nut, but he does call it right.

spacemanmatt 12y ago
He's nutty, not a nut. Subtle but important difference. His calls are amazingly far-reaching. But yes, he can call 'em. The trouble is, his Al Gore beats his delivery. They both gotta up their PR game.
- kefka 12y ago
  Good point. He is nutty, but still is right on. I work in Emergent technology/ R&D at a university, and we get questions like "what can I buy that will just work"? I look towards Free Software, and what is published. If there's a free software solution for it, it'll never go away. However, if there's a loose corporate control, then it probably will fade. But if there's iron-grip control, the device will go away as soon as something shiner comes out to take its place. That last one is Apple.

josefresco 12y ago

I'm curious to hear more about the meaning of "The system was totally hacked". "Farrugia told the court that hackers with names like “DVD Jon” and “Requiem” made Apple “very paranoid” about protecting iTunes. Updates that deleted non-Apple music files were intended to protect consumers from those system break-ins. “The system was totally hacked,” he said." Is he stating that the iPhone OS (was it called iOS back then?) was completely hacked, or that the work-around to get music onto an iPod outside of iTunes was "hacked"? I'm assuming the former, just curious on the background there.

fixermark 12y ago

It's interesting that I don't hear these stories from the Android or Windows Phone ecosystems. I think this might be a situation where Apple being first-mover has been a disadvantage to them; they started with a "sync to one single computer" design, and have been patching on that over and over to move into the new ecosystems. The other options in the market started with a "sync to cloud" design, so they had to solve issues of merging and collating data from multiple devices out of the starting gate.

mcphage 12y ago
> I think this might be a situation where Apple being first-mover has been a disadvantage to them Also, when Android started, music was only sold without DRM. And incompatible flavors of DRM is what this whole thing is about. Windows Phone was around then, but I don't know much about music on it.

arca_vorago 12y ago

It's part of the move away from ownership and towards leasing and licensing of everything. Because there is much more profit there. I started out as a BSD guy, who transitioned as the *nix desktop got better to gnu/linux. The more I learned about the differences between gpl/bsd and the more I thought about the philosophical underpinnings, the more I am convinced that Richard Stallman, while eccentric and sometimes hard to bear for some, was and is a man ahead of his time, and that he is absolutely right when he talks about the four freedoms. Despite this, at my recent new position, I gave in and decided to dive into the apple ecosystem because "spend less time fixing your system and more time working!" was what I kept getting told. I also have apple users so the ability to support them is important. That being said, I have been increasingly dissatisfied with the whole system, both in it's functionality and its philosophy. (which is a whole post within itself) I'm about ready to scrap it all and return to something I have more control over. The bottom line is this: If you don't have root on your device, you don't own it. (iPhone, iPod, iPad, Android phone, Windows phone, Smart TV's, gaming consoles, we are increasingly surrounded by devices we don't have control over. I was listening to a talk about why bsd is a better ecosystem, and it is, in many ways, and the presenter said something that really struck me. He said, paraphrasing, "...and we recently found out [whichever]bsd is in the playstation 4." He said it in a way that was supposed to be impressive, as in "hey look, our shit is so awesome and business friendly that it got put on the new playstation!" An audience member then said something along the lines of, "is the source code released?" And of course the speaker had to mumble "no" and move on quickly. It's the epitome of the problem. BSD licensing enables companies to restrict the freedom of the user, full stop. I truly believe GPL is just getting started in the future of science, technology, and communication.