6 ms·

It is Apple's fault because they could have easily defaulted to preserving all songs rather than deleting them. It took extra work for Apple programmers to add

by reedlaw 12y ago

It is Apple's fault because they could have easily defaulted to preserving all songs rather than deleting them. It took extra work for Apple programmers to add a function to iTunes that removes songs not purchased in the same region. Were they really coerced into such behavior? It's more likely that this "feature" was a selling point for record companies, not consumers. Moral of the story: check who owns software before using it.

mcphage 12y ago
> It's more likely that this "feature" was a selling point for record companies, not consumers. From parent: > 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 So if they don't charge you again, then what's the selling point for record companies?
- fpgeek 12y ago
  The selling point is that there's enough uncertainty and complexity in the process that many (most?) people won't successfully avoid charges for re-buying music. The icing is that the mere existence of the complex, uncertain process insulates record companies from accusations that they're forcing people to re-buy music (as with the transition to CDs). Re-buying just happens to be the much more convenient option.
- reedlaw 12y ago
  Apple can say they don't automatically copy over songs purchased in another region. Allowing you to "purchase" the songs again for free sounds like a workaround that the parent found. However you look at it it's not for the good of the customer.
  - mironathetin 12y ago
    Correct. The back door is already written in the terms and conditions. Have fun reading them. Wasn't it Steve Jobs who said, he never signs a contract that is longer than a page?
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - psykovsky 12y ago
      Steve Jobs could have said whatever he wanted without it being true. The problem isn't in him saying it, the problem are certain persons who believe it and repeat the nonsense.
      - mironathetin 12y ago
        Is your comment in any way related to my post? Steve Jobs may not have signed complex contracts. This does not exclude, that Apples layers make the customers sign complex contracts, does it? Steve Jobs promoted the digital lifestyle, although he was a vinyl junkie and owned high-end audio stuff. The point is, that the advice he gave about the length of contracts is good, unimportant if he followed it or not. It is useful for customers to follow and that does certainly not exclude apples customers (although, nowadays, you may not be able to buy a slice of bread, if you insist on short terms and conditions).
    - digi_owl 12y ago
      Jobs was a master of saying one thing today and then contradicting himself tomorrow without hesitation or acknowledgment.
  - mcphage 12y ago
    > However you look at it it's not for the good of the customer. Yeah, it's obnoxious as fuck. But it doesn't cost any more money.
eridius 12y ago
Your reply is completely unrelated to the parent. shurcooL backed up his device and restored to a new device, and the music was missing. Most likely, he didn't actually sync the music to the computer, so the computer didn't have the files in order to sync back to the device. The fact that it was from a different store meant the device also couldn't redownload them from the store (because the per-country stores are effectively completely different stores).
- reedlaw 12y ago
  > 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. Sounds like he made an effort to preserve his files. I know from personal experience how easy it is to mess something up with iTunes and lose all data. Like when the iOS 8 upgrade failed and the only way to unbrick the iPad was to reset it through iTunes.
- shurcooL 12y ago
  > Most likely, he didn't actually sync the music to the computer, so the computer didn't have the files in order to sync back to the device. Quite the opposite. I had the computer before the iPad mini, and all music is on it. In fact, it still has the music. I did a full backup and restored on new iOS device, and this brought back everything (apps, settings, contacts, etc.) except the songs.
  - eridius 12y ago
    If your music is in iTunes, and you restore your device from iTunes, and you have iTunes set to sync music to your device, then your music will be synced to the device. So either your music isn't in iTunes, or iTunes isn't set to sync music to your device.
    - michaelmrose 12y ago
      Or perhaps your reading comprehension sucks
mironathetin 12y ago
"Moral of the story: check who owns software before using it." How do you check software behaviour without using it and falling into the trap? I agree that it is most likely a feature that music companies request. They usually don't allow sales and use under equal conditions everywhere (see youtube).
- dublinben 12y ago
  >How do you check software behaviour without using it and falling into the trap? Read the source code. You shouldn't trust software that doesn't let you do that.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
digi_owl 12y ago
Color of bits comes to mind...
fixermark 12y ago
>> It took extra work for Apple programmers to add a function to iTunes that removes songs not purchased in the same region. I certainly wasn't involved in the project, but it's easy to imagine a scenario where it's actually easier to do it this way. "Replace data" is an easier operation to implement than "merge."
- Karunamon 12y ago
  That was my read on this too. Consider how an iPod reacts (or used to, I haven't used one in a long time now) when you plug it into an iTunes instance that isn't the one you originally synced it with - it asks if you want to flatten everything and replace it with the contents of the connected library.
GrinningFool 12y ago
Not necessarily true: in a simple relational DB, it could be that 'region_cd' is part of the primary key. This would have the same effect, and was probably driven by a then-reasonable initial requirement. It seems very likely that no 'delete' ability was added to support this.

by reedlaw 12y ago

mcphage 12y ago

> It's more likely that this "feature" was a selling point for record companies, not consumers. From parent: > 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 So if they don't charge you again, then what's the selling point for record companies?

fpgeek 12y ago
The selling point is that there's enough uncertainty and complexity in the process that many (most?) people won't successfully avoid charges for re-buying music. The icing is that the mere existence of the complex, uncertain process insulates record companies from accusations that they're forcing people to re-buy music (as with the transition to CDs). Re-buying just happens to be the much more convenient option.
reedlaw 12y ago
Apple can say they don't automatically copy over songs purchased in another region. Allowing you to "purchase" the songs again for free sounds like a workaround that the parent found. However you look at it it's not for the good of the customer.
- mironathetin 12y ago
  Correct. The back door is already written in the terms and conditions. Have fun reading them. Wasn't it Steve Jobs who said, he never signs a contract that is longer than a page?
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - psykovsky 12y ago
    Steve Jobs could have said whatever he wanted without it being true. The problem isn't in him saying it, the problem are certain persons who believe it and repeat the nonsense.
    - mironathetin 12y ago
      Is your comment in any way related to my post? Steve Jobs may not have signed complex contracts. This does not exclude, that Apples layers make the customers sign complex contracts, does it? Steve Jobs promoted the digital lifestyle, although he was a vinyl junkie and owned high-end audio stuff. The point is, that the advice he gave about the length of contracts is good, unimportant if he followed it or not. It is useful for customers to follow and that does certainly not exclude apples customers (although, nowadays, you may not be able to buy a slice of bread, if you insist on short terms and conditions).
  - digi_owl 12y ago
    Jobs was a master of saying one thing today and then contradicting himself tomorrow without hesitation or acknowledgment.
- mcphage 12y ago
  > However you look at it it's not for the good of the customer. Yeah, it's obnoxious as fuck. But it doesn't cost any more money.

eridius 12y ago

Your reply is completely unrelated to the parent. shurcooL backed up his device and restored to a new device, and the music was missing. Most likely, he didn't actually sync the music to the computer, so the computer didn't have the files in order to sync back to the device. The fact that it was from a different store meant the device also couldn't redownload them from the store (because the per-country stores are effectively completely different stores).

reedlaw 12y ago
> 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. Sounds like he made an effort to preserve his files. I know from personal experience how easy it is to mess something up with iTunes and lose all data. Like when the iOS 8 upgrade failed and the only way to unbrick the iPad was to reset it through iTunes.
shurcooL 12y ago
> Most likely, he didn't actually sync the music to the computer, so the computer didn't have the files in order to sync back to the device. Quite the opposite. I had the computer before the iPad mini, and all music is on it. In fact, it still has the music. I did a full backup and restored on new iOS device, and this brought back everything (apps, settings, contacts, etc.) except the songs.
- eridius 12y ago
  If your music is in iTunes, and you restore your device from iTunes, and you have iTunes set to sync music to your device, then your music will be synced to the device. So either your music isn't in iTunes, or iTunes isn't set to sync music to your device.
  - michaelmrose 12y ago
    Or perhaps your reading comprehension sucks

mironathetin 12y ago

"Moral of the story: check who owns software before using it." How do you check software behaviour without using it and falling into the trap? I agree that it is most likely a feature that music companies request. They usually don't allow sales and use under equal conditions everywhere (see youtube).

dublinben 12y ago
>How do you check software behaviour without using it and falling into the trap? Read the source code. You shouldn't trust software that doesn't let you do that.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]

digi_owl 12y ago

Color of bits comes to mind...

fixermark 12y ago

>> It took extra work for Apple programmers to add a function to iTunes that removes songs not purchased in the same region. I certainly wasn't involved in the project, but it's easy to imagine a scenario where it's actually easier to do it this way. "Replace data" is an easier operation to implement than "merge."

Karunamon 12y ago
That was my read on this too. Consider how an iPod reacts (or used to, I haven't used one in a long time now) when you plug it into an iTunes instance that isn't the one you originally synced it with - it asks if you want to flatten everything and replace it with the contents of the connected library.

GrinningFool 12y ago

Not necessarily true: in a simple relational DB, it could be that 'region_cd' is part of the primary key. This would have the same effect, and was probably driven by a then-reasonable initial requirement. It seems very likely that no 'delete' ability was added to support this.