Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
DoubleTwist Launches iTunes-Like Desktop Application for Amazon MP3 Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I would like that too, but putting out an identical carbon copy does nothing to encourage any innovation.
But DT is not an identical carbon copy. It has support for many more devices and file formats and it uses another online store. It also lacks the biggest bug of iTunes: Vendor lock-in.
Personally I'd rather see Songbird become mature enough though. Right now it lacks many super-basic features (compilation grouping ffs!) and is rather buggy. Maybe in a couple of years...
All Music is DRM Free at this time on iTunes.
Movies & Music Videos are required by the Studios to have DRM and this goes for ever provider of Movie Downloads.
Vender Lock in has nothing to do with Apples Own Media Software for their own Devices.
Vender Lock in is a restriction of both "HARDWARE or SOFTWARE" Since Apple Publishes it own API and XML Information to access iTunes Library's it is not Vender Locked in.
Not liking the choice of Software doesn't mean it is a Vender Lock-in anyone can access itunes XML files and use the API to develop their own package.
Example is Motorola's new software, it accesses Apples iTunes Just Fine, So the Lock-in Comment is a Ruse of misunderstanding and entitlement.
By your comment there is no context's to substantiate your Vender Lock in remark.
And on the flip side; if iPod / iPhone and iTunes was locked into each other that would mean that only itunes could be used as a media supplier but look at the options.
Anyone can use these services to get music from.
1.) Amazon Music Store
2.) eMusic
3.) Napster
4.) Rhapsody
5.) iTunes
iTunes is offered Free and its primary means is to support Apple Devices it's just an added bonus that users can download and use it even if they don't have an Apple Device. But Apple Has never Advertised Syncing with other devices officially.
A Vender or individual can develop their own syncing software to manage their own hardware and then in turn use the Published Apple iTunes API and XML files to add to their own Software.
People may not like it, but there is nothing against the law here, if there was Microsoft would be up the creek also since Microsoft marketplace is not offered for iPod or iPhones and is the sole distributor for Zune with syncing capabilities.
Both Apple and Microsoft have their own Software platforms for their perspective Hardware devices, and they may offer what support they want on their own terms since it is part of the Business model they choose to follow.
You may not like it, but business is businesses and choice is a consumers option, you can chose whatever device you like to fit your needs "Research the Best device for yourself and purchase it" but arguing about not having more options of choice in software with "Lock-in" when there is no lock-in after the fact is completely asinine.
Vender Lock-In is a Common term used by the Linux free software brigade when they don't like something, it's not a widely used term.
Just a question.
If you hate Apple so much, then why the hell are you here?
I own a MacBook Pro, and iPod Touch, an iPod Shuffle, an AppleTV, and an Airport Extreme. I've bought an iMac, an iPod Shuffle and an AppleTV for my girlfriend. Clearly, I don't hate Apple. I do, however, get fed up with all of the Apple apologists/fanbois who stick their fingers in their ears and sing loudly when someone dares to question their deity, the great Steve Jobs.
This product is not a copy of iTunes, and it really isn't even competition to it, unless you think of iTunes and the iPod franchise as one integrated product.
This product allows users of other devices to leverage their music collection, one that they've already paid for, on other devices besides the iPod. It also allows them to easily buy music from someone other than Apple.
I use iTunes to sync my iPod products, and feed my AppleTV, because it works reasonably well for that purpose, and better than anything else (Nothing else really will work, because Apple has worked diligently to prevent that.). Of course, Apple has had 8 years of complete control of the hardware and software, in a closed architecture, to get it to where it stands today, while this product is designed to work well with a multitude of different devices from different manufacturers. Case in point, after I loaded it yesterday morning, I was able to sync my iTunes library, and playlists onto both my MyTouch and my Blackberry within a few minutes.
As far as the a**inine statement earlier in the forum asking "Why would you use an inferior device?" All I can say is this:
My MyTouch:
Has a removable battery
Has removable and upgradeable storage
Can run multiple applications at once
Uses a carrier that isn't AT&T
Has a very open source OS
Looks great (subjective, I know)
Is just as easy to use as the iPhone (I've run both. Have you?)
Seems to me that an argument could be made that the iPhone is the inferior device, depending on how much value you put on the items above.
What's that got to do with anything?
Well, I was replying to some other folks. I thought that was evident...
This is my feeling exactly. Yes, there are a few new features (the profile and feed) but these are pretty minor.
Seems especially silly that they present themselves as the nonconformist choice, when in fact they just duplicate it. And how about that 1984-style commercial? An ad that depicts being unique that is a remake of another ad?
You must have noticed the snippet you quoted very plainly shows me saying Apple bought the product.
Buying a product and building off it are not the same thing, and thus my use of the phrase "borrowed heavily."
It wasn't the same product that they bought and rebranded, it was a new product that they built which borrowed features from their new purchase. Is that so difficult to understand?
This has been the way to add features to existing products since the inception of IT. Is that your objection? Are you looking for some sort of technological purity here, that it's only a valid product if it was originally hatched as an internal project?
Hehe Kamil has never been one for having a stable personality.I was in complete disagreement with you, but your clever user of a single sentence in an embiggened 28pt Helvetica Black font magically swayed me to your side.
Hehe Kamil has never been one for having a stable personality.
Same goes for your moderating skills and general social acceptance.
Go away Luke.
You are just citing other examples of copy-catting. If GIMP's main focus is to simply emulate photoshop, they will always be 1-2 steps behind Adobe, and GIMP will always be a poor substitute for photoshop that people have to settle for.
Mozilla Firefox did not copy IE, they created a better browser, which I believe is why it is popular. What if OS X was just an emulation of Windows, because as you put it "everyone and their mom has [Windows]." DT is not going to gain market-share by copying iTunes. Right now DT is just iTunes lite with support for more devices (and support for more devices is valuable, and I support that), but it's a shame it's interface is just an iTunes copycat, because they could attempt to surpass iTunes. Thats the kind of innovation developers should strive for.
Great, now that thats established. DoubleTwist is also a better media management application.
logic - 1
jptelthorst - 0
Great point, as long as you make an assertion, that must mean it is: 1) logical 2) true. Sarcasm aside, why don't you try reading what I wrote, and thinking about it, and then perhaps posting a thoughtful reply?
Really? I seem to remember it floating around a lot back when I did my internship with Sun Microsystems in the mid-nineties. Interesting to know that despite e.g. charging $120 for a floppy drive they had already been borged into the Linux collective only a few months after 1.0 was released.
I'm going to remember that when the iPod Touch announces OLED screens.
I think that would count more as a technology improvement, rather than a design choice. It would be like saying IBM copied Apple for upgrading to color screens.