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.
reformatting PB for the first time
- Thread starter orijinal
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not completely sure, but when i get info on my Mac HD my format reads as:
Format: Mac OS Extended (Journaled)
Format: Mac OS Extended (Journaled)
Unless you have a specific need to format it as a UNIX disk, you should use Mac OS Extended.orijinal said:
Just a polite reminder. Back-up all of your important files before doing the E&I. Make sure the back-ups work as well. And de-authorize your iTMS account.
ftaok said:
? I don't understand (sorry); one needs to do this when reformatting? I thought you could just re-download songs from iTMS? (Have only used it a few times, so I'm not really sure about this, but an explanation would be much appreciated).
Thx
There's two questions here.akm said:
1. Can you redownload songs from the iTMS that you have previously bought and downloaded? The answer to this one is no. Once you have completely downloaded a song, that's it. It's up to you to back-up that file. If you accidentally erase it or your hard drive crashes, Apple will not allow you to redownload the lost song(s), unless you pay them again.
2. Why do I need to de-authorize my computer when re-formatting? You are allowed to have up to 5 computers authorized to an iTMS account at any one time. If you format your computer (or a hard drive crashes) and you hadn't de-authorized, you will lose one of the 5 authorizations. Apple will allow you to de-authorize all of your computers at one time, however, you will only be allowed to do this once per year, and only when you have reached the 5 computer limit.
I've lost an authorization when my wife's hard drive crashed (ironically, it happened when I was installing iTunes 4.9). Since we only have 2 computers, I haven't been able to use the "de-authorize all" function since I've only activated "three" of my allotted five authorizations.
I hope this clears up the confusion. And do back up your purchased tracks. It'll save some agrevation if/when you lose your songs.
ft
Yet another reason I refuse to use the iTunes Store
And this is precisely why iTunes is such a ripoff. You can't "own" the music, it's far easier to lose it once purchased, the quality is completely inferior to CDs, and you must have iTunes installed onto your computer, which makes the software effectively like an operating system, and we all know what Windows is like, now that it's been controlling the market for so long.
ftaok said:
And this is precisely why iTunes is such a ripoff. You can't "own" the music, it's far easier to lose it once purchased, the quality is completely inferior to CDs, and you must have iTunes installed onto your computer, which makes the software effectively like an operating system, and we all know what Windows is like, now that it's been controlling the market for so long.
Dude,BlueT said:
Relax, it's just music. Some people prefer CDs, others prefer downloaded tracks. Personally, I'll buy one or two tracks because I don't particularly enjoy paying $12 plus tax for a CD with only 1 or 2 good tracks.
I won't argue the "owning" point, but in my usage, it's a moot point since I don't own more than 2 computers.
As for losing the music, it's just as easy to lose a CD that you've bought than it is to lose a CD with your downloaded tracks, right???
And while an original CD is sonically superior to an iTMS track, I personally can't tell the difference. I listen to songs on my iPod and in my car (with a standard 4 speaker system). Not quite an audiophile's dream.
So while iTMS might not be a good fit for you, it works for me (and countless others).
ftaok said:
A CD gives you a lifetime of music that can be manipulated any way you'd like. Granted, CDs are overpriced, but that's another argument altogether. And no, a CD cannot be lost like a file can be lost. A harddrive that's used at least 5 times a day for a couple years straight is far more unstable that a CD, especially since all the data can be transferred from the CD to the drive once and locked away in storage after that. And BTW, you can absolutely tell the difference if you convert the authorized AAC to MP3.
iTunes is a ripoff and in a few years, when all the "coolness" of it disappears, consumers are going to be mighty pissed off, if they remember that they spent hundreds of dollars. Not to mention that everyone who gives iTunes their money now further propagates this terrible method of music distribution.
blue,BlueT said:
You're certainly entitled to your opinions, but you glossed over one of my points. A purchase CD can be lost just as easily as a CD with my burned iTMS tracks. You see, every so often, I back up my iTMS purchases onto a CD-R.
Also, while "you" may be able to tell the difference between a CD and an AAC, not everyone can (or even care). Personally, I don't have any music equipment that cost more than $100, so I'm not exactly worried about audio quality.
I also don't understand your point "you can absolutely tell the difference if you convert the authorized AAC to MP3". Converting my purchased AACs to MP3 is something that I have never done. I think I've missed the point here.
BTW, if iTMS is such a terrible way of distributing music, what would you suggest? With the advent of downloadable music, I find that I no longer have a desire to buy physical CDs at the local store.
ft
ftaok said:
Buying AAC requires you to use iTunes for the life of your music and everyone here (Mac fans) will tell you that having software that only works on Windows sucks. Consumers like to have options, especially when something better comes along (and that's guaranteed). Again, you have to use iTunes forever. And why I mentioned switching AAC to MP3 is that this transition gives the power back to the consumer, but at a huge loss in quality. Ripping AAC to MP3 yields awful music.
Regarding audio quality, there's something to be said about the degradation of quality of music since so many people don't "listen" to music anymore, but simply treat it as background noise (which explains why so much pop music sucks). But, again, that's a different argument altogether.
As far as other options are concerned, if iTunes sold their products in WAV, Lossless, or MP3, I think their model would be awesome. But that would get them in trouble with the record labels. As it stands, the labels have way too much control, which makes it really difficult for us consumers right now. And there is no simple alternative. But proprietary standards ruin the online buying experience. It's like Adobe not distributing a free reader. Or DOC files that can only be read in Microsoft. AAC is an awful format that does not help consumers fight the stranglehold that labels have. It only helps them.
First off, I'd like to apologize for contributing to the hi-jacking of this thread. With that said, I'd like to further address this arguement.
I understand that any music I buy from the iTMS is forever linked to iTunes. I bought the track understanding that. I won't feel cheated in the future when something better comes along because I knew what I bought going in. Keep in mind that this is always the case regardless of format. For instance, when people in the 70s bought 8-track tapes, they could only listen to them on 8-track players. Same with LPs, cassettes, CDs, miniDisk, etc. One day, your CD collection will be obsolete just as iTMS tracks.
ft
OK, I get what you were saying about converting from AAC to MP3. But for me, it's a moot point. If I'm listening on something other than my Shuffle, it's on a burned CD, so the song is as good as the original AAC.BlueT said:
I understand that any music I buy from the iTMS is forever linked to iTunes. I bought the track understanding that. I won't feel cheated in the future when something better comes along because I knew what I bought going in. Keep in mind that this is always the case regardless of format. For instance, when people in the 70s bought 8-track tapes, they could only listen to them on 8-track players. Same with LPs, cassettes, CDs, miniDisk, etc. One day, your CD collection will be obsolete just as iTMS tracks.
You're right, that's a shift in societal behavior and probably has led to lots of lousy music. But the real fact is that not everyone has the equipment to fully appreciate perfect music. But I do agree with your point here.
If Apple sold songs in a lossless format, but still with DRM, would that be acceptable to you? Or is your objection to the DRM itself? Because most experts say that AAC is superior to MP3 (although I can't really tell). Also, AAC is not a proprietary standard. It is a very open standard. The proprietary part is Apple Fairplay DRM. But now I'm just nit-picking.
ft
ftaok said:
The examples you present are all hardware based. iTunes is a specific software, which IMHO, presents a completely different scenario. For instance, CDs can be played on a thousand different brands of machines and despite the medium being proprietary (in the loosest sense of the word), the ability to use CDs is so cheap and universal that considering it proprietary is silly. OTOH, iTunes is not the best, or even a great music management system. Yet everyone who has bought an AAC is forced to use it.
And yes, I am thoroughly opposed to using DRM in the way that Apple has done it. I'm similarly opposed to Napster, the Sony Music Store...as well as using BitTorrent. IMHO, stealing intellectual property is just as bad as restricting it like Apple or Napster.
Problem is, I don't have a viable solution to this. Most people don't. Which is why we let Apple get away with what they do. And why using torrents is so popular.
Blue,
You're mixing up the points I'm saying. I never said that CDs were proprietary, even though technically, they are. My points were that all formats lock you into certain devices. It was in response to your claim that "when all the "coolness" of it disappears, consumers are going to be mighty pissed off, if they remember that they spent hundreds of dollars." My point is that consumers weren't pissed off when their investment in LPs became obsolete when CDs came around and people won't be pissed when iTMS becomes obsolete. Everything will eventually become obsolete.
If you're going to have a debate, keep the rebuttals to the point. Don't mix and match arguments.
And why are you bringing up the stuff about Torrents. That's a whole 'nother discussion.
If you hate DRM, fine. Don't buy the product. But don't tell me that just because you don't like it that noone else should either.
You're mixing up the points I'm saying. I never said that CDs were proprietary, even though technically, they are. My points were that all formats lock you into certain devices. It was in response to your claim that "when all the "coolness" of it disappears, consumers are going to be mighty pissed off, if they remember that they spent hundreds of dollars." My point is that consumers weren't pissed off when their investment in LPs became obsolete when CDs came around and people won't be pissed when iTMS becomes obsolete. Everything will eventually become obsolete.
If you're going to have a debate, keep the rebuttals to the point. Don't mix and match arguments.
And why are you bringing up the stuff about Torrents. That's a whole 'nother discussion.
If you hate DRM, fine. Don't buy the product. But don't tell me that just because you don't like it that noone else should either.
ftaok said:
Except that software, unlike hardware like CDs and tapes, has a much shorter lifespan. Especially if there is no way to move beyond your limitation. How do you think we have CDs of all the old records? Because the format was proprietary through hardware restrictions, not software. Now we have technology that can transport records, tapes, etc. into CDs and beyond without loss of quality. AAC presents a different problem altogether. Apple OWNS the DRM rights, which it can use whenever it likes. And the only way to continue to use the system is to feed Apple's machine. Records, tapes, and CDs do not require one specific manufacturer, or distributor. They are freely duplicated (with full quality) for personal use.
The arguments do match. And torrents are an important part of this discussion because they are the next leap in intellectual property theft. Torrents affect us all because they cause record labels and hardware manufacturers to utilize crippling technology. It makes them money and hurts consumers.
And I can tell people to stop using iTunes. The same way I can tell people not to shop at Wal-Mart. I believe that there is an ethical responsibility to tell people what they're giving up by using such terrible technology.
Blue,BlueT said:
This is the last reply I'm going to make on this thread. If you want to continue this debate, start another thread so that this one doesn't lose it's focus.
Anyways, you keep adding unrelated stuff to your argument. If you're going to debate, keep it on point. I'm not saying your points aren't valid, because they are, it's just that I'm arguing one thing and you rebut with an unconnected point.
I'm not going to repeat what I wrote in my previous post, so if you want to see what I'm talking about, scroll up a few screens.
As for you being the social conscience for the public by telling people to not shop at Wal-mart, that's your choice. I'm not even going to touch that pandora's box.