[Ti] Re: like hell freezing over ?

[Timothy Luoma]

On Jun 10, 2005, at 6:29 AM, ~flipper wrote:

> Timothy Luoma wrote:
>
>> On Jun 9, 2005, at 8:10 PM, ~flipper wrote:
>>
>>> The DRM thing... dark side stuff, and something I associated with  
>>> Wintel.
>>
>> LOL... the most successful DRM stuff in the world has been iTunes  
>> music store, started on OS X.
>
> It's been successful because it doesn't lock out material from  
> other sources. you can have mp3s or WAV files (etc) right along  
> side material bought from Apple. On the Palladium-style (hardware/ 
> software 'trusted') systems, that will change, you'll be in either/ 
> or situation then.

It's astounding to me how many people think they are smarter than  
everyone working on the inside of this deal.

Assume that there's a new format that Apple uses, we'll called it  
"QT8" for the sake of argument.

QT8 is tied to your hardware.  You can download episodes of TV shows  
for $x (where x is undefined for the sake of this discussion because  
it's irrelevant).  You can watch these on your Mac and any display  
which is connected to it (i.e. a TV).  You can burn them to Y number  
of DVDs (where "Y" is similarly undefined for same reasons).  You can  
stream them across your local LAN.

That would be the iTunes model applied to video.

That, or something like that, is what I expect Apple to come up with  
if they are going to mimic the success of iTunes, this time for  
video.  They'll have some app which is a combination of iTunes and  
iPhoto for storing clips.

Now you're suggesting that Apple will come up with some solution  
which does not allow you to view video from other sources?  In  
iTunes, you can have unprotected mp3s or WAVs that you have made.  In  
iTunes/Video you'll be able to view unprotected video the same as  
always (home movies, unprotected AVIs, etc).  What would make you  
think Apple wouldn't allow video from other sources?

Apple was successful because they found a way for customers and the  
music industry to get enough of what they both wanted.  Suddenly  
they're going to forget all that?

> You want a company somewhere (Apple, intel, Microsoft) determining  
> what you have and can access on 'your' PC??? That's an interesting  
> take on 'successful'.

Cut the histrionics and exaggerations.  iTunes, whether you like it  
or not, is hugely successful, and yes it limits what you can do with  
what you "own".  The idea that Apple is going to try to force people  
to only viewing "allowed" material is absurd and completely  
unsubstantiated by any previous action.

You're saying what will be based on your experience of how things  
have been in the past rather than assuming that they will find a  
different way to do it.  I'd be hard-pressed to come up with some  
evidence to support that reasoning other than "When other people did  
it, they did it this way."

Well, Apple doesn't do things the way that people have done them  
before, that's why they came up with iTunes when most people thought  
that trading illegal MP3s was the best & only way, and the music  
industry was just waving their hands in the air yelling "FOR THE LOVE  
OF GOD, STOP!  THINK ABOUT ALL THE POOR STARVING ARTISTS WHO YOU'RE  
STEALING FROM!  THAT'S OUR JOB!"

Ugh.  The pessimism and narrowness is really starting to make this  
whole thing a bore.

TjL