Apple Faces Suit Over iPod-iTunes Link

Ok, all of you guys saying to go ahead and fucking burn CDs to later rip back on to your computer to be DRM free, this is total bullshit.

Sure, I REALLY want to sit at my computer burning my 45 gigs of music to CDs, and then later ripping them. Really guys, that's an AWESOME idea. What's even more awesome is that you simply imply that I feel like spending my money on blank CDs to actually burn the music to. Just what I wanted, to spend MORE money on the music that I purchased legal, so that I can waste my time burning it all and then ripping it.

I'm sorry guys, I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with any of this. But I'm saying that this is NOT a valid argument at all, it's rather a ridiculous attempt to defend Apple by any means necessary. I don't have a problem with defending Apple at all, in fact I love Apple, and iPods.

However - If I'm even hitting the correct issue (There's been so many thrown around, I don't even know what the lawsuit is really about), arguing the fact that there's no legal way to transfer iTunes music to any other player is like being upset because you want to play blu-ray movies in your DVD player. There's nothing wrong in creating a format that is proprietary *cough* UMD *cough*. People need to get over stuff like this and argue about important things.
 
Oh yeah, and before anyone gives me some, "Well you could use 1 CD-RW to burn it all, and then your problem is solved" bullshit, I'd like to say this.

Yes, I'd really love to spend that much more time burning the CDs. CD-RWs can't be written to as fast as regular CD-Rs AND then I'd have to erase them every time, so yeah, no. Don't even say it.
 
You're a cheapass. CDs cost next to nothing, and the small cost to burn and rip iTunes songs is worth the compatibility gained. You just happen to be unfortunate enough to have a huge collection of music. Not everyone has 45GB of music, at least not music they'd want on a portable player. But perhaps you love each and every song comprising that 45GB.

If your 45GB of music is all from iTunes, then you should be defending Apple until you die. I'm going to assume that some of that music isn't from iTunes, and so likely you wouldn't have to rip those songs. Just songs from iTunes.
 
To those of you who think that Apple somehow has a monopoly here...do you know what the term "monopoly" means as far as the law is concerned? I doubt you do, otherwise you would see how ridiculous this is.
 
matt fury said:
To those of you who think that Apple somehow has a monopoly here...do you know what the term "monopoly" means as far as the law is concerned? I doubt you do, otherwise you would see how ridiculous this is.
Click to expand...
While I'm on your side, you've introduced a new premise without further explanation. I'm warning you of the hole before an adversary comes along to crawl through it.
 
Microsoft includes IE, gets sued and called a monopoly and the peasants rejoice.

Apple uses ipod and itunes, gets sued and called a monopoly and the peasants grab their pitchforks.

Eitherway, I love seeing a bite taken out of apple for any reason, but being about the ipod and itunes (which I've always hated) is just carmel on the apple.
 
If I created an electronic/computer item, you're damn right people would use the cables I made and the software I made to use the product. It'd prevent RMA's caused from people trying to do their own thing. I can KNOW that the shit works when I send it to them. If a problem arises, I can KNOW that the defect/problem is with the unit I sold and not some hacked ass software to "use less resources".

And to the IE/Microsoft thing. You want an operating system to ship with no browser? Then not be able to get on the internet? Or ship with all 20 of them? What about all those "resources"?

If I created an operating system, I would include all necessary software. I'd also leave the option to change software (example, Internet Explorer) to something 3rd party. OH wait, microsoft did that. They include everything you need (internet access) to go and get something else.

Yeah right on including third party software on MY operating system that I sell. That's not only free advertisement to a competitor in another software division, but that's a possibility for shit going wrong.

/laughs at people that are about to say "shit already goes wrong lol!"
 
Agree 100%! I too thought the MS/IE thing was unfounded. It was a free add-on provided that could be easily removed or you could just use something else. Silly people!

mdameron said:
If I created an electronic/computer item, you're damn right people would use the cables I made and the software I made to use the product. It'd prevent RMA's caused from people trying to do their own thing. I can KNOW that the shit works when I send it to them. If a problem arises, I can KNOW that the defect/problem is with the unit I sold and not some hacked ass software to "use less resources".

And to the IE/Microsoft thing. You want an operating system to ship with no browser? Then not be able to get on the internet? Or ship with all 20 of them? What about all those "resources"?

If I created an operating system, I would include all necessary software. I'd also leave the option to change software (example, Internet Explorer) to something 3rd party. OH wait, microsoft did that. They include everything you need (internet access) to go and get something else.

Yeah right on including third party software on MY operating system that I sell. That's not only free advertisement to a competitor in another software division, but that's a possibility for shit going wrong.

/laughs at people that are about to say "shit already goes wrong lol!"
Click to expand...
 
GJSNeptune said:
While I'm on your side, you've introduced a new premise without further explanation. I'm warning you of the hole before an adversary comes along to crawl through it.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the heads-up, but it looks like now I'll have to beat that badger when it pops up.
 
Vryce said:
I'm still trying to understand how anything to do with iPod or iTunes constitutes a monopoly. There are plenty of other players available. There are plenty of other ways to purchase music and video available. You don't have to purchase an iPod if you want a digital music player. You don't have to purchase iTunes music or video if you want digital media files. You don't have to have an iPod to purchase iTunes music or video. You don't have to purchase iTunes music and video if you own an iPod. Where is the monopoly?

I guess they're defining iTunes files as a class of product. As a class of product, there must be competition in selling it, so Apple must allow others to sell iTunes files?

Or is it that iTunes and the iPod have such a sales lead over their competition that they must be cheating? Maybe Apple is doing steroids?
Click to expand...
<3

Yes, I agree that the lawsuit is quite dumb. I don't agree with Apple locking their music, but they can do what they want as far as I'm concerned. I get all my music from CD and put it on the iPod in mp3 format. My music is all transferable to any player I want, I just choose to use Apple.
 
matt fury said:
To those of you who think that Apple somehow has a monopoly here...do you know what the term "monopoly" means as far as the law is concerned? I doubt you do, otherwise you would see how ridiculous this is.
Click to expand...


Apple has just as much a monopoly as microsoft ever did. Yet, I bet you didn't defend microsoft when people claimed they were a monopoly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top