Steve Jobs, You are a hypocrite

[gauchogolfer]

As far as "MS doing more design on the Zune than Apple does on the Mac", have you ever thought about the iMac? How many other competitors out there have an all-in-one solution that looks as good as the iMac? Ever consider how many design choices went into that fabrication process? It's not like it magically invented itself. If it was so easy, I'd bet a lot of other manufacturers would be doing it as well, based on the success of the iMac.

 

[clevin]

But this points out that it is optimized. Even though you can still pick out the exact same hardware doesn't detract from the fact that it is still optimized for that same hardware, it's just not put together by Apple. Which is, I know, what everyone complains about, but Apple is making a ton of money doing it this way, and what doesn't give them the right to do it? I know people hate it (and me to an extent), but just because we don't like it doesn't mean that they can't do what they are doing...

exactly, u are completely right on this, this is why Im totally agree with the author Steve Jobs is hypocrite,. I don't care how many "good ol' loyalties" think Jobs is the angel from heaven, doing everything for the consideration of users. lol, the only fact is he is making money, even if that means he would put restrictions on their products. While at the same time, good ol' loyalties can get so excited just by an empty talk, its surprising and saddening.

 

[adrianblaine]

As far as "MS doing more design on the Zune than Apple does on the Mac", have you ever thought about the iMac? How many other competitors out there have an all-in-one solution that looks as good as the iMac? Ever consider how many design choices went into that fabrication process? It's not like it magically invented itself. If it was so easy, I'd bet a lot of other manufacturers would be doing it as well, based on the success of the iMac.

I think what they were getting at, was that even the iMac (and all Macs) have pretty much all the same hardware in it that any other PC has, and Apple didn't design that hardware, just how it all fit together. I may be mistaken however.

 

[bellychris]

well it is true apple could easily license their os, but it would take a lot longer for them to update and innovate their os. I mean look at windows, a lot of their problems come from the many different possible configurations that are out there. Also look at how long it took vista to release. I mean why do we use apple computers to begin with? If we wanted a system like windows we could just use windows, nobody is forcing us to use a mac. The only way I could see this working and keeping apples streamlined feel intact is releasing the os to only a select few computer manufacturers.

 

[clevin]

well it is true apple could easily license their os, but it would take a lot longer for them to update and innovate their os. I mean look at windows, a lot of their problems come from the many different possible configurations that are out there. Also look at how long it took vista to release. I mean why do we use apple computers to begin with? If we wanted a system like windows we could just use windows, nobody is forcing us to use a mac. The only way I could see this working and keeping apples streamlined feel intact is releasing the os to only a select few computer manufacturers.

u do have a point, it does take longer time to release an OS with good hardware compatibility. But consider
1. Apple has alot of cash
2. OSX is Unix rooted, Apple is not doing it alone.
3. the reason vista being slow is because it has a huge user base and huge software base, so they need to think much more about backward compatibility, if windows can do it in 6 years, OSX at least should be able to do it in 3 years, right now, apple release their OSX every 1-2 years, no much difference if u ask me.
4. I use a mac because of the OSX, i have no doubt about that, but apple is forcing me using a certain combination of hardwares, which, trust me, some of them are crap.

 

[adrianblaine]

this is why Im totally agree with the author Steve Jobs is hypocrite.

While I am in agreement with you for the most part, and going back somewhat on topic, is that what Apple is doing with the Mac is different than DRM and the music business. Music is not software or hardware, but in this day and age, both are require to play music back to us.

Music is unique in that it is art, yet anyone can own that piece of art. People can own paintings, but there is only one original painting, everyone else's are just copies and not worth much. We in effect are owning both the original, and a copy of someone's Music, and while Monet's paintings are priceless, we can own a musical performance that many people consider pricless, for $0.99. It makes sense that people who make their living off of making music don't want it floating around for free.

While that is not really what this topic is about, I'm just pointing out the problems inherent with selling/owning Music in general. An OS and a computer have nothing in common with Music, so I don't agree that they should both be under the same blanket view.

 

[carbonmotion]

Here's something that I never get about DRM. First off, DRM on itunes music is fairly easy to circumvent. Secondly, in terms of software DRMs like OSX... companies in capitalist societies are suppose to look out for their share holder. If one does not like OSX on expensive apple hardware, one can always buy a Dell and install linux on it. If you don't like OS X's DRM, why not just use linux? The best way to show your distaste for apple is to choose another product. If you don't, that's your own problem. I don't have a problem with people illegally installing OS X on a PC, but to complain about it after it stops working seems really silly.

 

[Sesshi]

Here's something that I never get about DRM. First off, DRM on itunes music is fairly easy to circumvent. Secondly, in terms of software DRMs like OSX... companies in capitalist societies are suppose to look out for their share holder. If one does not like OSX on expensive apple hardware, one can always buy a Dell and install linux on it. If you don't like OS X's DRM, why not just use linux? The best way to show your distaste for apple is to choose another product. If you don't, that's your own problem. I don't have a problem with people illegally installing OS X on a PC, but to complain about it after it stops working seems really silly.

It is.

But so is the restriction.

It's called irony.

 

[clevin]

Here's something that I never get about DRM. First off, DRM on itunes music is fairly easy to circumvent. Secondly, in terms of software DRMs like OSX... companies in capitalist societies are suppose to look out for their share holder. If one does not like OSX on expensive apple hardware, one can always buy a Dell and install linux on it. If you don't like OS X's DRM, why not just use linux? The best way to show your distaste for apple is to choose another product. If you don't, that's your own problem. I don't have a problem with people illegally installing OS X on a PC, but to complain about it after it stops working seems really silly.

u confused problem of compatibility and problem of intentional prevention. and I didn't attack DRM, Steve Jobs did.

 

[aristobrat]

and I didn't attack DRM, Steve Jobs did.

Did Steve Jobs "attack" DRM, or did he respond to Norway and others who want DRM stripped from iTS-purchased music?

i was being sarcastic, yes, im aware u can use windows, or linux on mac, but when the guy accused M$ of "forcing windows on consumers", what exactly did M$ limited his choice?

I'm guessing your not old enough to have remembered this in the news.

http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f0000/0046.htm

Read points 20-35.

Point 36 pretty much sums up how Microsoft has "forced Windows on consumers" (and gives a good reason for why Apple started out making its own hardware).

 

[panoz7]

u confused problem of compatibility and problem of intentional prevention. and I didn't attack DRM, Steve Jobs did.

Would it really kill you to use proper grammar, spelling, and capitalization? I'm sure you occasionally have some good points but I'm not willing to spend time trying to interpret what you've written... I'm sure others agree.

I'm no fan of DRM... but it is necessary in some cases. I think music should be DRM free. I buy all my music on CDs and from eMusic for that reason.

If apple were to release OS X onto generic hardware I'm pretty sure they would go out of business. Same with the iPhone; apple could not have developed and afford to sell the iPhone at the current costs without being subsidized by cingular. In both cases if the DRM was removed the product would eventually no longer be produced.

Music is different. Music can (and does) exist without DRM and will continued to be produced whether the RIAA pushes DRM or not. I think the main difference is that music is an art. Musicians are artists who often produce music simply because of the their love for the artform.

 

[balamw]

Apple didn't design that hardware, just how it all fit together.

While Apple had much more of a hand in designing or specifying custom parts for for the PPC Macs than Intel Macs. Getting all the pieces to fit together in a small , elegant and energy efficient package is a much larger task than one might think.

Though I can't find an online source for the quote Seymour Cray was once to have said that he didn't consider himself a computer engineer/designer, rather that he was a pro at thermal management. Apple excels in this area too.

B

 

[adrianblaine]

I think the main difference is that music is an art. Musicians are artists who often produce music simply because of the their love for the artform.

Until they get hungry

 

[balamw]

Music is different. Music can (and does) exist without DRM and will continued to be produced whether the RIAA pushes DRM or not. I think the main difference is that music is an art. Musicians are artists who often produce music simply because of the their love for the artform.

FWIW Steve Jobs' point is that 90% of the music sold today is already sold without DRM, on CD. Unless the RIAA is going to stop making new CDs it is somewhat pointless to place additional restrictions on digital downloads that are not already on CD.

I do find it a bit disingenuous that Steve Jobs didn't even mention movies/tv shows/software in his article, but there is one fundamental difference between those other forms of content and music.

Expectation.

Since the invention of the Walkman we expect music we purchase to be portable and go anywhere with us from home to car to bike, etc...
The cassette made music that was already omnipresent portable, and the CD took that a step further. All without DRM.

We don't yet have that expectation for video content or software. You don't expect to be able to play a VHS tape anywhere or watch a Beta tape on your DVD player. You also don't expect Windows software to work on a Mac or the latest Xbox 360 game to play on your Wii.

This expectation is bound to change over time, but as Steve Jobs has already said more than once the experience of listening to music and the experience of watching TV are very different.

How many of us listen to music while we _____? How many watch TV?

(Insert work, study, work out, commute, eat, have sex, etc.... for _____)


B

 

[panoz7]

Until they get hungry

Do you honestly feel that musicians would no longer make money if DRM was removed? How much harder is DRM actually making it to share music? My library is 100% legal and about 97% DRM free. My friend's libraries are closer to 10% legal but also 100% DRM free... My point being that people who don't steal music now won't start stealing if DRM disappears and people who currently steal music aren't going to stop because of more effective DRM.

 

[panoz7]

FWIW Steve Jobs' point is that 90% of the music sold today is already sold without DRM, on CD. Unless the RIAA is going to stop making new CDs it is somewhat pointless to place additional restrictions on digital downloads that are not already on CD....

Exactly.

I also agree that not mentioning movies and videos was a bit disingenuous. I think DRM has more of a place with movies (because of higher costs of production) but I'd still love to see it abolished.

 

[stealthman1]

How many of you complaining about DRM leave your houses unlocked when you go to work? Look I'm no fan of the RIAA, they've crapped plenty on their golden goose, but at this point you can plug an iPod into virtually anything so complaining that their is DRM on an iTunes music is pretty rediculous. The only way Apple can make money in the M$ controlled world is to keep a tight reign on their products. They've been damn smart to do this and OSX users should thank their lucky stars Apple has done this, other wise there would be no OSX. Care to start a list of the companies M$ has buried just because they could? By the way you lock your doors so the 1% of the population who would take your crap doesn't. Remember Napster? What % was stealing from the RIAA? DRM and iTunes got the record companies on the net. Anyone willing to pay more for no DRM?

 

[bearbo]

I'll agree with that, but I think OS X wouldn't be so nice if just anyone started putting it on their own hardware. But as clevin points out, you can still use the exact same hardware anyway in a different enclosure and still won't work...

that's because apple intentionally put unnecessary restriction on there. (not that i have a problem with that particular point)

As far as "MS doing more design on the Zune than Apple does on the Mac", have you ever thought about the iMac? How many other competitors out there have an all-in-one solution that looks as good as the iMac? Ever consider how many design choices went into that fabrication process? It's not like it magically invented itself. If it was so easy, I'd bet a lot of other manufacturers would be doing it as well, based on the success of the iMac.

iMac is of lovely design, but when was the last time apple put that kind of effort in designing their computer? i dont see it in MBP, i dont see it MB, not in MP, not in the current iMac, and the innovation in mini is few yrs old too.

I think what they were getting at, was that even the iMac (and all Macs) have pretty much all the same hardware in it that any other PC has, and Apple didn't design that hardware, just how it all fit together. I may be mistaken however.

no, as i said, i do agree iMac is of very good design, just apple doesn't do that anymore.

While Apple had much more of a hand in designing or specifying custom parts for for the PPC Macs than Intel Macs. Getting all the pieces to fit together in a small , elegant and energy efficient package is a much larger task than one might think.

maybe in the PPC macs, but not in the intel ones. there is no part in the intel macs that required apple's R&D (par the form factor, which is old, not that i dont like it)


i have no problem for OS X to be on mac hardware only, i like that. but to say apple designe their own computer hardware nowadays, is ridiculous.

 

[stealthman1]

iMac is of lovely design, but when was the last time apple put that kind of effort in designing their computer? i dont see it in MBP, i dont see it MB, not in MP, not in the current iMac, and the innovation in mini is few yrs old too.



no, as i said, i do agree iMac is of very good design, just apple doesn't do that anymore.



maybe in the PPC macs, but not in the intel ones. there is no part in the intel macs that required apple's R&D (par the form factor, which is old, not that i dont like it)


i have no problem for OS X to be on mac hardware only, i like that. but to say apple designe their own computer hardware nowadays, is ridiculous.

You've gone kooky! No design in a MP? Have you ever seen one? It's the best designed workstation on the market, it's allmost as beautiful inside as out no matter what hardware you stuff inside of it.

 

[adrianblaine]

Do you honestly feel that musicians would no longer make money if DRM was removed? How much harder is DRM actually making it to share music? My library is 100% legal and about 97% DRM free. My friend's libraries are closer to 10% legal but also 100% DRM free... My point being that people who don't steal music now won't start stealing if DRM disappears and people who currently steal music aren't going to stop because of more effective DRM.

No, that wasn't my argument at all. I was responding to the notion that musicians are making music simply because they love doing it. My dad is a musician and makes music simply for the love of making music, but he makes very little money doing it, so my response was more sarcastic than anything, because he got hungry and had to find other jobs to make money to support his music making.

The article this thread is based on, is that Jobs wants to get rid of DRM, which you are in agreement with obviously, but do you agree with the author that he is a hypocrite for wanting this?

 

[bearbo]

You've gone kooky! No design in a MP? Have you ever seen one? It's the best designed workstation on the market, it's allmost as beautiful inside as out no matter what hardware you stuff inside of it.

it is beautiful, and i want one. but i don't think apple did much to it from powermac G5. tell me what aspect of it makes it the best designed workstation on the market, in term of hardware.

again, i'm not saying apple NEVER cared for its macintosh computer, just not recently.

INTEL made the CPUs cooler, which enabled apple to take out all the fans, which allowed apple to put 2 more HDD and 1 more optical drive. those were existing needs, and not apple's innovation. the rest of the components, apple just squeezed them in there, based on the design of motherboard from an intel's template, i believe.

so tell me, what did apple do to Mac Pro?

 

[balamw]

So tell me, what did apple do to Mac Pro?

Build a system out of a bunch of parts.

Much like a BMW 3 series might take many of the same components found in the Mini Cooper, but they can still be very different cars.

Compare the Mac Pro to a similar Dell or the Intel reference design and you will ultimately find what they have done.

B

 

[Sesshi]

You've gone kooky! No design in a MP? Have you ever seen one? It's the best designed workstation on the market, it's allmost as beautiful inside as out no matter what hardware you stuff inside of it.

It is undoubtedly the best designed in terms of looks on the market. As I've found out through ownership, it's one of the more poorly engineered. And a workstation should be engineered first, designed in terms of looks second. The Pro pretty much sums up everything I dislike about Apple 'Pro' hardware - and why I would, if given the chance, run OS X apps requiring robust hardware of high power to run on an HP or Dell equivalent.

 

[FleurDuMal]

But music is completely different to an operating system. What makes OSX so appealing is that it is significantly more stable and efficient than Windows, and that is because it is designed to work only on Apple hardware, not just any hardware combination a la Windows. If Apple started to imitate Windows with OSX the net result would be that it would just start to suffer the same pitfalls as it.

Licensing OSX to other users would have no discernable benefit to its users. Removing DRM from music would. Therein lies the blatant flaw in the ranters argument.

 

[stealthman1]

it is beautiful, and i want one. but i don't think apple did much to it from powermac G5. tell me what aspect of it makes it the best designed workstation on the market, in term of hardware.

again, i'm not saying apple NEVER cared for its macintosh computer, just not recently.

INTEL made the CPUs cooler, which enabled apple to take out all the fans, which allowed apple to put 2 more HDD and 1 more optical drive. those were existing needs, and not apple's innovation. the rest of the components, apple just squeezed them in there, based on the design of motherboard from an intel's template, i believe.

so tell me, what did apple do to Mac Pro?

Good grief, a child could swap out 4 hard drives, 4 RAM DIMMS, and put in an extra video card in less than 15 minutes and never worry about pinching cables, ripping out sticky SATA connectors, or having sweat drip onto the motherboard. It's beautiful inside because it's engineered so well.