I worked at AT&T in the late 1990s on an early on music sales (not streaming) service called a2b Music. It sounds ridiculous now (why would AT&T call up they could succeed in consumer-facing music sales!) but at the time they were a co-owner of the AAC patents and wanted to commercialize them. They also had lots of bandwidth and idea this made sense.
Existence "responsible" folks (and also having no option in the matter) AT&T bent over backward to adapt the labels. Half the production was proprietary DRM that made everything constantly unusable. Despite this, the labels still strangled united states by limiting what we could sell. Apple quite correctly ignored all of this and solved the problem past outset launching the iPod, waiting until it had critical mass (much of which involved tons of unpaid MP3 downloading) and then launching the iTunes Shop in 2003 when they had an installed base total of piracy - and the major labels had no choice but to join on their terms. (Patently I compassion the small labels who got screwed in the dynamic.)
I call back about this a lot when people complain about cryptocurrency or Uber/Lyft evading regulations or destroying legacy businesses. Often this kind of behavior is bad, oftentimes the footling guy gets crushed. But at the end of the day, legacy businesses actually are poison and much of the awfulness could be avoided if they weren't trying to hold on to things so tightly.
> why would AT&T think they could succeed in consumer-facing music sales
Their customers already had the devices on them all the time for playing music, but it was still owned by AT&T (sim lock) and they had the paymen platform with the phone bill. Of course both wasn't really good and they tried to avoid whatsoever bigger investment, which made them lose. But notwithstanding it kinda made sense from a buisness perspective.
Sony bought CBS records entirely because of how the disastrous the whole DAT rollout was because of the record companies fears of consumers being able to make digital recordings at home.
Sony's MiniDisc recorder/thespian failed because of copy protection. Too bad, it was a really squeamish system for its 24-hour interval.
> and the major labels had no choice just to join on their terms.
iTunes launched with DRM. It was eliminated from 2008.
FairPlay DRM was an utter breath of fresh air compared to the DRM we were using at AT&T. There were other companies similar InterTrust competing at the time to build incredibly-restrictive powerful DRM, and despite all this crazy work (many PhDs in cryptography!) the labels kept asking for more before they would begrudgingly put a few titles on sale. FairPlay DRM was "just expert enough" to satisfy the DRM requirement while as well being pretty easy to interruption, and it remained more than or less regularly "broken" for many years. This didn't matter considering it turned out that very few people pirated content by breaking the DRM (especially when you could just rip a CD yourself.) Equally y'all pointed out, Apple eventually got rid of it.
In my after security evaluation career I saw a similar dynamic play out for other DRM companies, and even saw how corrupt the industry was. If you knew the right people or had enough market power your DRM would be "good plenty", and if not: tough luck. Technical evaluation didn't matter.
The DRM was totally reasonably. Even though it was hackable, you lot didn't actually demand to, at to the lowest degree in my use cases it was fine.
I contrast that with some phone I bought earlier that supported some number of songs (nightmare), with zune (nightmare). Apple picked a level of lockdown that I'd estimate for 80% of users didn't interfere. That compares to the other foks dramatically.
and allowed you to stream your whole library to, well, pretty much anyone.
early on iTunes was pretty slick, in my opinion. We had then many shares streaming in the office. people curated playlists and clicked that share button. loved it.
Yeah information technology had a lot compared to the residuum. Also probably the simply 1 of those services where you can still play your collection.
That's a weird takeaway. My takeaway is that content is male monarch. Content has tilted our whole legal system to its advantage, and the transition to digital has made it worse. It is anti-consumer, anti-competition, anti-innovation, anti-backer.
I was also in one case dissed by Steve Jobs at a keynote!
Back when widgets first came out for OS X I was in higher and was offset to learn programming. I was sill very bad, simply these widgets interested me because they were essentially only lilliputian HTML/CSS/JS webpages. I looked around and saw at that place was no widget for CNN news.
CNN had RSS feeds of their news, I constitute some other widget that displayed an RSS feed and basically just plugged this new information source in and it worked! Next I but restyled it to look like information technology the CNN website which at the fourth dimension was calorie-free blueish and pretty ugly, but I made this widget to lucifer.
I released information technology, and it got some downloads! Months later at the WWDC keynote, I was watching live and I saw Steve sit down at the demo computer and testify off some widgets on the big screen. The CNN widget I made was at that place on screen at the keynote! I didn't believe information technology at first, I was in stupor. Adjacent though, when he showed my widget his simply annotate was that "it's non as nice looking equally [some other news widget] but information technology gets the job washed."
Ouch! Not only was Steve Jobs personally enlightened of a piece of software I (kind of) wrote but he demoed it at WWDC! But he also said it looked pretty bad... And he was correct, it did.
Shortly later on this I restyled the widget to look squeamish on its own, regardless of what the CNN website actually looked similar. While this stung, it was a good design lesson to acquire. Thanks Steve!
> I flew home that nighttime, posted my coming together notes on my website, emailed all of my clients to announce the news, and went to sleep.
>When I woke, I had furious emails and voicemails from my contact at Apple.
>"What the hell are y'all doing? That coming together was confidential! Have those notes off your site immediately! Our legal department is furious!"
Wait, who the hell posts meeting notes on their website (and also emails all their clients without a written confirmation at the said meeting)? I would assume whatever meeting you lot'd have with a client/potential would be assumed to be confidential. I felt this particular move was very unprofessional on the OP'southward function.
A meeting with a hundred of your closest friends isn't a meeting, much less a private coming together, it's a public proclamation. Possibly if all of those hundred are your employees you lot could consider it individual, but bold it wouldn't leak would exist naïve. Apple wanted a couple weeks head offset on Rhapsody and Napster, and they fucked up and forgot to inform their guests that the announcement was under wraps. There's not more to it.
Right. More than that, you lot become NDAs signed earlier the meeting. I've never known this to not be standard do. At least when the person yous're talking to doesn't take a greater leverage in the meeting—only and then you naturally restrict what y'all say under such a circumstance. This sounds like kittenish behavior on the role of Apple, just honestly when I've never been able to modify the snooze time on the alarm app, that is what I expect. If I were CD Babe, I would have never gone back to that, as long term you've got greater leverage when all the competitors are getting access. In fact, I would have doubled down and paid developers to start working on iPod compatibility for the competitors.
Because it concerned my clients — the musicians.
Apple says "we want to sell all of your clients' music now".
I post something on the visitor blog, read mainly past my clients, saying Apple wants to sell your music now.
In all honesty, your slashdot post contains massive corporeality of proprietary Apple information that was disclosed to you, valuable statistics, Apple's business programme and what not. This was at the time when Apple tree was vulnerable and much bigger competitors could have easily eaten their lunch. I can't believe they had no NDAs. I think the original commodity is bit 1 sided story.
If there were no NDAs, every single bit of that "proprietary information" was public information.
Are you seriously appealing to sentimental sympathies right now? Apple is and was an entirely for-profit entity whose vendors are likewise. And we're supposed to extend one another sympathy? There are limits to professional person courtesy.
If Apple was so vulnerable, failing to get attendees to sign NDAs was just more astringent incompetence of the kind that made them vulnerable. Information technology's not someone else's job to babysit them.
It's odd that they forgot to brand y'all sign something. I wonder why they played it that way.
Merely let'due south say that they were in a rush and forgot. And so, why the acrimony when an apology and a sincere request would take been merely every bit good.
And why was Jobs such a dick nearly it subsequently?
To me, information technology seems that he was angry that someone was making money off the artists before he was.
If a deal is inked, you can mail, but fifty-fifty so normally you'd cheque in near messaging. I recall you were just super pumped :) merely it'due south nevertheless a imitation pas.
I guess it depends whether OP fabricated their service as startup looking for a great exit, or a passion project based on their hobby that got extended to their friends.
Personal or business concern information technology doesn't matter. If y'all met your friend for java and they told yous they are pregnant (for instance) would you feel emboldened to post on Twitter congratulations without even asking her if she wants the world to know?
I get that this was 2003 only if anything information technology would have seemed even more than rude before social media made posting nigh your life online more acceptable.
But to use your analogy, if my friend invited a few hundred people she knew and told us she was pregnant, so yeah, I would experience fine posting nearly it on Instagram.
The difference is that the pregnancy doesn't touch on the lives of all the people on Twitter. This guy was communicating with his clients, who had to respond to the news past working to prepare their albums for upload to iTunes. He had a perfectly legitimate reason for posting this on his website.
It was a meeting most a new service/product relevant to the services he provides his clients. It doesn't seem that weird, especially if he saw his responsibleness to then to be similar to that of a level or amanuensis.
Wow! Thanks for finding this! I'1000 so glad someone saved it.
(I'm the original author.)
If I empathize the article correctly, are (some/about) files for sale on the iTunes store taken from CD rips rather than made straight from the masters?
That sounds impressively sketchy; anyone who has used AccurateRip can probably prove that CD ripping errors and manufacturing errors are surprisingly common.
At the fourth dimension, the CD was oftentimes the practical chief. Many recordings had come from analog record, sent to a mastering house, who burned the last master to a CD.
Anyhow, I skipped this item in the original commodity, but Apple let go of the requirement to employ their special "put the CD in the drive" tool. We were able to deliver using master WAV/FLAC files, converted to their AAC requirements, and uploaded.
Yeah, I was on the other stop of this at the time and had a bunch of those aureate colored CDs labeled Chief for each album
Yeah I was going to say, surely you did not stop up ripping 200,000 CDs in a couple of weeks
If they hadn't, surely there was a scriptable method that didn't involve re-ripping?
Or I guess you lot might have been able to do a scriptable method that does involve re-ripping.
That is, stick a CD-RW in the bulldoze, and write a programme that would:
(one) Erase the CD-RW, then burn one anthology's worth of WAV files to it. (Ideally, practice it accurately similar with a cue canvass file.)
(2) Drive the Apple software'south GUI (using AppleScript?) to enter the track metadata, re-rip, and upload.
(3) Echo until done.
If something ejects the CD-RW, that might mess up the automation. Some drives will pull the CD back in if the tray or disc bumps into something while ejecting, so maybe a strategically-placed heavy object is enough.
Note that this is from the early days of iTunes--things could exist radically different behind the scenes now.
I suspect if information technology isn't listed as 'Apple Lossless' or one of the other fancy labels, its probably originally from a CD rip somewhere. I know from listening to niche-y music, that music catalogs can often be incorrect and will be published to multiple music sites. For case Junior Brown's album 'Junior Brownish: Greatest Hits' has a track on it that is one-half glitches AND its the exact same on multiple services and has persisted for years even though I reported information technology several times on each service. There'south also a sea shanty album where half the tracks are static. I reported it to iTunes and Amazon and received boilerplate responses. I and then sent an email to the actual ring (difficult to believe, but its a bunch of quondam guys) and they contacted their tape company...but even they couldn't go it straightened out.
Even when it lists Apple Lossless, there can still be errors in the files.
I found an album from 2001 on Apple Music recently and discovered one of the tracks cuts out at but after one minute, fifty-fifty though Discogs reports the track should exist iv minutes 30 seconds (Slide - Closure (Lounge-Tech Mix), on the Nu Progressive Era compilation: https://www.discogs.com/master/90383-Red-Jerry-Nu-Progressiv...). The album is listed equally "Apple Lossless".
I went and bought the original CD version Only to have that ane track in total.
"Mastered for iTunes" is the tag that means someone really listened to it. (Technically it means the AAC file was checked that information technology doesn't have more clipping after encode than before information technology. There'southward a public PDF about this out at that place somewhere.)
Back in the early 2000s, I worked for a company that was supplying sound media to Apple, Spotify, etc. and yeah, the record companies would ship them boxes of CDs for ripping, cover scanning, track listing inputting, etc. For some of the companies, it was the but way they had - they didn't have the metadata or cover art in easy digital grade, masters available, etc., peculiarly for older stuff.
Yes. I was initially in charge of getting all the music from all the major and indie labels into our organization when I worked at what was the biggest competitor to iTunes in Europe. Information technology was 100% from CD. I call back at the finish nosotros had a storage unit of measurement with hundreds of thousands of CDs. Nosotros had teams of young girls and guys working twenty-four hour period in, day out ripping CDs.
Nosotros did our absolute all-time to go the high quality rips nosotros could. We sabbatum on the forums and figured out what the all-time CD-ROM drives were, even if it meant buying actually expensive SCSI versions.
But none of the labels had anything in digital format in prior to 2003. I think the majors only started their conversions of their catalogs in nigh 2004 or 2005.
Merely some other background I'll throw out in that location - the company I worked at opened all the doors at most of the record labels. Nearly weren't ready to sell their stuff online (WTF) and needed a lot of persuasion. Later we got them to sign, Apple would follow us in days or weeks later and take a dainty easy task. That was how we found out Apple was trying to build a music store of their own.
And Apple tree had a expert fourth dimension with the labels. At that fourth dimension, and peradventure even now, most record labels used Macs for practically everything they did, even admin stuff. And so when nosotros went in with a more often than not-PC demo, they looked at us sideways. Apple could slide in with shiny stuff and print them more :)
@sivers: Did we take all your catalog? This was OD2 (On Demand Distribution) in the UK. I take a feeling we did?
It was probably the fastest way at the time to build up their initial itemize quickly; for masters or the best quality recordings, they would need some way to go the music from the masters into the software, and I don't believe Apple had any good audio in ports.
I do recall at some point they had a headphone jack that likewise supported optical, but don't quote me on that.
Anyway, it would have been better if they had an app that accepted .wav files or something like that.
They could have easily hired a specialized company to receive masters and ship them digitized versions. They weren't every bit ludicrously opulent equally they are today, merely they were even so a pretty wealthy and assisting company.
Merely why pay, when you tin get your own vendors to practise it for free after a picayune song and dance past the Jobster? That's much more Apple tree.
The iPod helped save Apple. IIRC information technology, even more than than the iMac, helped render them to profitability.
> I do remember at some bespeak they had a headphone jack that likewise supported optical, but don't quote me on that.
They used to on the Macbook Pro laptops (I accept one). Not sure if information technology's nevertheless a matter with the new Pro.
In Apple Music today they betoken if the rail is lossless and if it'southward taken from a chief. I believe that lossless studio master rips are 24-fleck / 192 kHz (CD is 16-fleck / 44 kHz).
The originals are whatever the creative person has. There isn't going to be a standard, peculiarly for indie music, and there'southward nothing magical about 24-chip/192khz that makes it a good format.
CD quality is already perfect, impossible for a homo to hear any improvement on. Except of course that it's only available in stereo postal service-mix.
>> anyone who has used AccurateRip can probably testify that CD ripping errors and manufacturing errors are surprisingly mutual.
CDs have significant fault correction codes then if it sounds right it IS right. Having said that, I accept 1 song I always skip because it ripped badly and I've never got around to re-ripping it and replacing the bad ane. Merely it'southward obvious that it's a bad rip to the indicate that I skip the song and then I don't have to hear the glitch.
In other words, if they checked each vocal earlier uploading information technology would be fine.
> CDs have pregnant error correction codes and so if it sounds right it IS right.
For data CD formats, yes. For audio CD formats, readers are immune to interpolate over uncorrectable errors (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C2_error), which would non necessarily event in an abrupt skip or popular.
>and so if it sounds correct information technology IS right
No, player will interpolate samples with detected simply uncorretable errors. Uncorrectable error rate of CD-DA was deemed too high for CD-ROM, thus it uses additional layer of ECC data on height of information technology.
> Having said that, I have ane song I e'er skip because it ripped desperately and I've never got around to re-ripping it and replacing the bad ane.
Heh. I take one that has well-nigh five seconds of silence, at the end of an album, then about ten seconds of horrifically loud dissonance. It still catches me off baby-sit every time, only it's not in heavy rotation and so I still haven't gotten around to trimming it.
I wonder if this is why there is a Dinosaur Jr vocal with a massive bad-rip hole nigh two-thirds in, on all the streaming platforms.
Article was written in 2010 about events that took identify in 2003 or so. Seems similar a strange arroyo fifty-fifty so but I don't know much well-nigh music distribution dorsum then, or now for that matter.
It's not clear to me if that is still actually the example.
Seems likely some are but as their system presumably grew more automated I'm guessing that's not so much the instance anymore? Maybe?
Definitely not, there's a specific website for uploading stuff, information technology's non done trough iTunes. If you're a musician or a small characterization y'all're gonna employ something similar CDBaby or DistroKid though, which uses an API or something equivalent.
I imagine it hasn't been the case for any new or remastered music added in at least the last ten years. They upgraded to 256 kbps in 2009 so CD-originated music surely would have ended by then.
This is why would always dump the CD to an ISO file then mount that and rip directly from the virtual CD.
That is factually incorrect. An ISO9660 is a filesystem on a data CD. An Audio CD is merely a stream of bits. That is why yous need to rip an audio CD, the CD player needs to transform that stream of bits into blocks of 4096 bytes. It has to remember where the previous block ended and the next block starts. For many years, you had to buy a luxury brand like Plextor to be certain that ripping process would happen without much stuttering and gaps.
Audio CDs do accept framing information (in the subchannel). However, the subchannel has no error correction (only basic error detection), and then the CD player has to interpolate across subchannel errors (which are normal and common) to figure out where information technology is, and doing that properly can get complicated.
Likewise, the audio frame size is 2352 bytes. Those correspond to 2048 information bytes for data CDs (plus extra mistake correction).
Sure, but many of the cd cloning tools at the turn of the century would name your fleck stream dumped to file with a .iso file type, not .IMG . That's what I'thou referring to. I recollect it was wondering the significant of that file format that led me to even acquire what an ISO standard was.
>The name "Audion" merely popped into my head during a shower
Not much of an electronics history buff, I gauge. Also the name of (arguably) the nigh important electronics invention of the beginning half of the 20th century.
deForest .. a man out of time.
So there was Basic. And Forrest Mims guides at RadioShack!
SoundJam definitely had the better proper name though.
Spinning fewer available songs equally an advantage is some high level bullshitting. Specially when yous immediately get out and get all those "edited" tracks.
You're talking most the company that publicly extolled their own "courage" when they removed the headphone jack from their phones.
Which was pitiful. If they had said "this makes your telephone last 5 minutes longer when it gets moisture" even I would take been cautiously optimistic. Just "courage" is a stupid statement.
That said, the existent reason is they decided bluetooth headphones were finally reliable enough
That's truthful. But they were going to sell them considering they were reliable enough. For a while at that place, bluetooth headphones were a nightmare.
Bluetooth is a nightmare. My jbl little box won't grab my telephone's awesome vibes unless they touch, otherwise audio gets chopped. I'k still trying to detect my uncomplicated in-in jack which has much improve range than "touching" and will make the setup requite me less cancer.
Also to hell with cordless peripherals, my so called keyboards and pointers are all catching dust because there's an inexorable need for these picayune toxic disgusting things called batteries, and don't you dare go a twelvemonth or ii without using your computers and thus managing their piffling chernobyls! technology from Apple tree and the modern oversupply can exist trusted solitary as much as a newborn and a rattlesnake.
This is a very, very personal and subjective take.
I've literally endless bluetooth audio and non audio devices and I don't have issues with any of them.
My MBP disconnects from BT speakers several times a day. It's 2 feet abroad, both are stationary.
Apple tree is notorious for having terrible Bluetooth on their devices.
Ironically the bluetooth on my AirPods, Macbook and iPhone are miles better than any other device I used in terms of bluetooth.
I sure do beloved chasing downwardly which device my headphones are currently connected to to convince it to disconnect because I need to take a video call...
My headphones connect to whatever device is currently being used unless I tell it to otherwise.
Once again a very specific anecdotal point.
My headphones enumerate the device(s) they connect to when I plow them on. I can notice out which by simply power cycling them.
> reliable plenty
Reliable enough for what? Uninterrupted playback (disallowment from drained batteries)? Nope.
Fifty-fifty more ridiculous, on their commencement iphone they spun not having video support as a positive.
Jack removal makes sense, if going for a dust and waterproof soap bar.
My Samsung is supposedly waterproof, simply moans if I do much as exhale in the charge hole.
No, it doesn't. Information technology'southward bullshit.
There'due south stuff like the Ulefone Armor 9 FLIP rugged smartphone which has the headphone jack and has even meliorate ingress protection than the iPhone:
> the actress padding and protection that comes with an IP68/IP69K-rated, MIL-STD-810G certified outdoor smartphone
Apple tree removed the headphone jack for Airbuds and to get actress money. Their accessory division would be a Fortune 500 company, on its own.
You don't get to be a billionaire by giving money away (or not picking it up when users throw it at you).
> Apple tree removed the headphone jack for Airbuds and to get extra coin. Their accompaniment sectionalization would be a Fortune 500 visitor, on its own.
Nothing makes this read stronger than the fact that Apple yet does, in fact, offer a portable device with a headphone jack, the iPod Touch.
You tin buy an iDevice that makes calls and texts, or one with a headphone jack. You lot can not have both in the aforementioned machine.
> A 3.5mm audio connector hidden backside a flap
I'grand not saying your argument is invalid but…certain the iPhone could also have a waterproof headphone jack if we wanted port covers on it too. The phone y'all linked looks nothing like something I want in my pocket all day
The Pixel 5a has a headphone jack, is waterproof, and has no port covers. It has an actual IP rating, with all the added expense that comes with, and withal is shockingly cheap. It has a great looking design and is very close in size to a contemporary iphone.
Information technology can exist done, Apple didn't do information technology because they didn't want to.
Many many phones had waterproof headphone jacks without flaps before the iPhone vii added waterproofing like the Galaxy S5. Many still do, eastward.g Samsung A52.
> The phone you linked looks nothing similar something I desire in my pocket all day
I rather doubt most people would really exist able to tell the deviation.
I've noticed that headphone cords are the main reason that I break my telephone.
I'chiliad debating switching to non-cabled headphones to ready that and relieve money on replacement screens
> the principal reason that I break my phone.
I'm not sure whether I'm more shocked you have multiple reasons/causes for breaking your phone or that you have plenty data points bachelor that you lot tin reliably place a "main reason" among those multiple reasons.
Seriously, have yous considered taking better care of your possessions?
How the hell do cabled headphones atomic number 82 to a broken screen? I've owned quite a diversity of mobile phones over the last 23 years, take never used a instance to protect any of them, have used cabled headphones with a bunch of them, and the only ane I've broken is 1 that I deliberately dropped into a glass of vodka and coke back in the year 2000 because I was smashed off my tits and it seemed similar a practiced idea at the fourth dimension (it wasn't, even though I'd been planning to replace it anyway - in the interim the lack of a phone was a major PITA for several days).
You realize that Apple offers Apple tree just features for all its stuff, therefore pushing its own products very hard? :-)
Individual responsibility does not work against $3tn corporations.
I personally cull to not buy any Apple production, only that's non going to bring the demise of Apple tree.
So why does your personal choice have to bring the cease of Apple tree?
Did Apple get to be 3 trillion by forcing people to buy stuff or buying selling things that people were willing to requite information technology money for?
But by y'all choosing to non buy Apple Bluetooth headphones y'all have a worse feel.
> Did Apple tree get to be 3 trillion by forcing people to buy stuff or buying selling things that people were willing to give information technology money for?
A combination of the two. Certain, they had some legitimately skilful products to start with. So did Standard Oil.
Standard Oil was commodity that people needed. No one is forced to buy Apple products. It's not even what the majority of people own.
The majority didn't ain a motorcar in the Standard Oil days (and it certainly wasn't a necessity of life). But it was an aspirational thing to own, and de rigueur for those of a certain social form.
The Samsung phones are waterproof, I have seen it accidentally tested.
I love my iPhone only, I really think information technology's no coincidence the headphone jack removal coincided with the release of airpods, but over a year and a half later the purchase of beats by Dre.
>Samsung phones
Yep, an S7 went swimming with me for about half on 60 minutes one day and after a quick pat down it worked just fine. I wouldn't listen the switch away from jacks and then much if most phones & bluetooth earbuds supported higher quality codecs, simply it seems relatively rare.
I put my s7 face downwardly in snowfall and it took 24hrs or so to accept a charger. Thought the port was dead. Wireless charging could be good in that regard.
No it doesn't. The LG V35 was faster, thinner, lighter, had a headphone jack, and had the verbal same IP rating as the equivalent iPhone of the fourth dimension.
And most other high end phones followed suit. I tin can't empathize why people are and so fastened to cords. They tangle, get defenseless into stuff and are plain inconvenient.
I tin can't empathize why people are and then fastened to cords
In my case:
- 1 less battery to charge (on work trips in particular, I accept a lot of devices/equipment that need daily charging)
- no worries nigh bluetooth synching or wireless interference
- less probable to lose
- better sound quality
To each their ain.
You can't imagine how many wired headphones I've thrown away because they take gotten frayed…
Is at that place annihilation nasty in a standard wired headphone though? My impression was that basic electronics are much easier to dispose of than lithium batteries.
No, if you are worried about "eastward-waste" worrying about tiny AirPods is not the answer.
It's only like these financial gurus telling people who are deep in debt to cutting coupons to relieve $4 a week.
So why were you worried most wired headphones getting frayed a couple of posts back?
My AKG K240'due south have a standard mini XLR to iii.5mm connector. I've had to supersede it maybe in one case in the 8 years I've had the headphones
Then since you lot aren't opposed to getting an extra connector, you shouldn't have whatever consequence getting a 3.5 inch to lightning connector…
Having swappable connectors is a plus for the ability to supercede the most common point of failure on wired headphones.
Really having to bring multiple connectors everywhere and swap them out more frequently than cables neglect is a negative.
Both can be true at one time.
No, because I'd have to swap it out if I wanted to use a dissimilar device. Every bit my second paragraph ays, having to swap information technology out frequently is a downside compared to my client device having a standard socket.
The headphone has a mini-XLR to 3.5mm connector built in. If it fails it'due south easy to supplant. If the client device supports the standard 3.5mm connector it doesn't have to give a shit that the other end is XLR on IntelMiner'south headphone (or in the instance of my own headphones, 2.5mm for i set and 3.5mm for the other).
Take ameliorate care of them? Or are you lot referring to the terrible wired ones Apple used to have?
Bluetooth syncing issues? I put my AirPods in my ear and my phone immediately switched to them. I put my telephone in my pocket and switch to my iPad and the sound switches. I get a phone call and reply information technology and my phone switches back.
If my wife wants to listen to the same thing I'thou listening to, we can share the sound.
...and I tell my iphone to stop sending audio to the bluetooth speaker and it disconnects, then immediately reconnects, until I un-pair it. And when my married woman pulls into the driveway my phone telephone call unexpectedly switches to her machine. Or my headset merely announces "disconnected" in my ear in the middle of a zoom occasionally. It's positively weird how infrequently these type of things happen when you just ... plug or unplug a wire.
and today while I was making dinner and listening to music on the bluetooth speaker in the kitchen, it all of a sudden disconnected from my phone and connected to my daughter's laptop where she was playing minecraft with her friends and everyone started screaming "what's going on?!" at me at a volume loud enough for the neighbors to hear.
Until they become defenseless on something while walking effectually, running through the airport, trying to get on and off planes, etc.
There is a reason I apply Bluetooth headphones with Apple chips…
Yes, having them become caught on something is annoying, only 99.44% of my headphone use is seated at my desk, where that never happens, and where nigh of my bluetooth bug Practise happen. I doubt in my unabridged life I've ever gotten on or off an airplane or run through an airport while wearing headphones.
I don't either. I have my Beats Flex just for travel and I fly on average at to the lowest degree once a calendar month. I take them off and hang them around my neck - not continued to my phone.
But that begs the question. Has the entire industry not figured out BT headphones aside from Apple?
I think that's a fair question. My understanding is that when airpods are talking to an iphone, they are non interim as merely BT devices, but use some proprietary apple juju that'due south "improve." And I'yard sure it's better, if wirelessness is your priority. But the drawbacks and price are far also much for me. I similar being able to have all my computers, devices, mixers, and headphones exist compatible without worrying nearly software. It's just ii analog signals going through a wire, and it's easy. And as a bonus I don't have to take two carve up sets of headphones to accommodate the non-bluetooth things like my electrical piano.
My Beats Flex toll $59 - at the drome. They are probably cheaper other places. They likewise have the Apple "juju".
My AirPods Pro piece of work well nearly all the time, but notably, not 100% of the time. Everything feels like magic until the things won't pair for some reason, or at that place's minor gaps in the audio, or the case won't evidence its charge state when opening it almost the phone — and there'south nada UI or feedback to bargain with it. Information technology'south infuriating.
Lastly, I enjoyed both wired headphones AND my Airpods when I still had my iPhone 6S. The choice between wired or wireless is a faux dichotomy.
Then the solution to a trouble that didn't exist before is to buy new hardware? Seems pretty wasteful and worse, not to mention some of that hardware is a vehicle with only an AUX port.
The $10 adapter apple sells doesn't sound as good as the one they used to build into their phones, and removes inline book/play/pause controls. Non simply that, merely now I lose access to my phone'southward charging port in order to use a wired connection (Charging needed during GPS usage), unless I buy an fifty-fifty more expensive adapter — virtually of which are unreliable and have universally terrible reviews.
Macs withal enjoy the best of both worlds with wired + wireless support — including the upcoming 2022 models — and it'southward hard to deny the phone (And tablet!) experience hasn't gotten worse without the three.5mm jack.
> The $x adapter apple sells doesn't sound as proficient equally the i they used to build into their phones, and removes inline volume/play/pause controls.
? It is just as good and it supports those controls and the microphone. There's multiple standards for the inline controls on TRRS though.
It also tests ameliorate than virtually audiophile DACs.
That adapter forces one to cull to heed to music or accuse a phone, which is very problematic when using GPS, as it'southward very battery intensive, especially as the phone is frequently in directly sunlight.
>Time moves on, should they also have not gotten rid of the 30 pin adapter?
Apple is still releasing new hardware with a 3.5mm port! The port is far from outdated. Once again, both wireless and wired audio coexisted nicely on the iPhone, this is a problem of their ain doing, and they've made the experience objectively worse.
We're just going to have to concur to disagree.
Apple is also releasing new hardware with multiple USB-C ports and an SD card reader. Does that mean it should also release an iPhone with all of those features?
iPhone never had SD card support, then that's a non-sequitur [Edit: Because nosotros're talking about unnecessarily deprecated features, non new ones]. And yeah, iPhone with USB-C support would be incredibly well received! Time to ditch the Lightning port asap.
It's not a non sequitur that Apple should have kept a headphone Jack on the iPhone because it is on other devices?
They did have 5 generations of phones with 30 pivot adapters.
Information technology takes a fraction of a 2d to 'pair' my wired headphones to my phone and take music start coming out. With BT I would take to charge them, turn them on, fiddle with a menu, wait for them to connect, and listen to a light-headed sound event. Fifty-fifty the tiny fade-in they add really annoys me. I like instant feedback with my devices, I like how I can experience the jack click into identify and music starts coming out with no perceptible filibuster.
I can't say I've always had a trouble with cords tangling or beingness inconvenient.
I just open my AirPods Pro example and stick the buds in my ear and sound automatically switches to my AirPods.
Even with my $59 Beats Flex, I just press a button and plough them on and they automatically pair. When they are taken out my ear and stuck together via the magnets, sound returns to my phone.
Not to mention how they seamlessly switch from my iPhone, iPad and Mac equally I change what I'one thousand doing.
Many reasons have already been mentioned, just I have some more.
Corded peripherals may exist inconvenient. In my experience though, they are usually less inconvenient than bluetooth ones. This probably varies by awarding.
Another major problem is latency. If I desire to use headphones to play a keyboard, very little latency is tolerable. Bluetooth doesn't fifty-fifty come close.
Are you playing the keyboard on Apple devices? If not, what does it have to do with Apple tree removing headphones?
They're replying to a post that said
>And well-nigh other loftier end phones followed suit. I can't empathize why people are so attached to cords
Not apple specific.
No. What is your obsession with phones? Apple tree has removed the ability to utilise wired headphones. So the wired headphones I take couldn't be used with my (hypothetical) Apple phone.
Considering the discussion is about Apple and nigh of the rest of high end phones removing the 30 twelvemonth old analog headphone jack from phones…
Yes. Ok, we've almost looped all the mode back around. In the context of talking about high end phones, this question was posed. (by yous)
> I can't understand why people are so fastened to cords.
On the assumption that you wanted to empathize some reasons people similar corded headphones, I provided some existent reasons. I employ my headphones for things other than my phone. But it would be nice to use them with the phone also.
If I'm listening to something and my phone battery is almost to die, I can just plug information technology in and keep listening. Not really an option with whatsoever Bluetooth headphones I've tried, even my gear up with a cord connecting the two doesn't allow use while charging.
If I'm listening to something and my phone is about to dice, I put it on one of my Qi chargers all around the house.
Only every bit a contrast to what they were actually complaining about, the headphones. Did yous somehow totally miss the 2nd judgement?!?
Reminds me of Nintendo Seal of Quality for the NES. The uncontrolled amount of crap games coming out for Atari was the demise of the home videogame wave at that time.
Nintendo felt the need to closely control the supply of games and their quality to "guarantee" a practiced experience.
In reality that seal was cypher more than a marketing term
Nintendo with its lockout chip held an absolute stranglehold on supply of NES games that came out
The "Aroused Video Game Nerd" of the mid 2000's was proof enough that plenty of shit got shoveled out on the NES
> Nintendo with its lockout chip held an absolute stranglehold on supply of NES games that came out
Yes, not only did Nintendo possess the unilateral say-so to make up one's mind which games got published, just Nintendo was the sole manufacturer of the game cartridges.
This meant that Nintendo decided when those cartridges would be manufactured, and set up an upper limit on the quantity. (Plus, they required you to pay for the manufacturing in advance.)
The fact that they controlled the manufacturing schedule meant that they might delay your cartridges if they had a get-go-party game in the pipeline which might compete with yours.
"The Reality Distortion Field is already at max capacity, captain!"
"I don't care, We Need More!"
Or yesterday, when they claimed that buying a $4000 Mac Studio advances social justice. That must accept been the most tortured attempt at checking off that box I've seen in a while.
> "Lamentable, you lot need to employ this software; there is no other fashion."
That's your cue to fix mitmproxy (or the 2003 equivalent?) and figure out how to talk to the service directly.
Hearing this story makes my heart eddy in rage. Is only way to achieve truthful success is by being ass Like Jobs ? If you have read annihilation about him by accounts of people who know him, You will know that he prepared that speech to spite on Sivers. Once his ego was satisfied later on Sivers had to refund the money he then gave a go ahead for deal. In that location is no benefit of doubt about it.
> "Whatever. Fucking Apple tree."
Should take concluded correct in that location and dropped the mic.
Refunding the $xl was the correct move and in keeping with CD Baby'southward ethos of the artist comes start.
And now he's dead in large office due to his ain arrogance. Looks like you got the terminal laugh!
Steve Jobs sure was an asshole.
Says a lot that a man who has been dead for over a decade still generates content worthy of the HN forepart page.
He dissed him and used it as an opportunity to glorify the labels. At the time Jobs was trying to cozy up to them.
Smart but a dick movement nonetheless.
12 years subsequently, does anyone accept any boosted perspective on this? The story didn't make much sense to me. Especially the stop where they went ahead and uploaded the music to Apple anyway. Why would they practise that? If someone treated me the way Apple treated CD Baby, I wouldn't put up with that level of abuse.
It was an case of Steve being Steve: he wanted their back catalog but he too wanted to excerpt a pound of mankind for their perceived slight more. He had absolutely no trouble doing or saying things that put partners (such as the Motorola Rokr presentation a couple years afterward) or fifty-fifty employees (the time he indirectly joked almost getting rid of Tony Fadell on stage) in a bad light/spot. Not saying he didn't ofttimes have a point, but he did it in a way that ofttimes came off as piffling and vindictive. In this case, he probably knew exactly where Apple was heading re: the music business and also probably viewed CD Baby as a competitor to be taken out, and then there was that aspect to information technology as well.
While I don't remember they've been (every bit) vindictive at a corporate level since Steve, Apple as a visitor has been yanking 'partners' around similar this whenever they had the power to for at least the last 15-twenty years, depending on the manufacture.
His responsibility is primarily to enabling his clients (the musicians) to make money from selling their music. Regardless of his feelings Apple was offering a sales channel for his musicians.
CD Infant was the biggest independent music distribution channel at the time (I have to epitome its been surpassed past Bandcamp now?) and iTunes was very clearly going to be one of the biggest markets available.
Getting the hundreds of thousands artists that utilise your service banned from iTunes considering someone was rude would've been a really terrible business organization decision.
I don't think the artists would be happy to miss the opportunity to be on iTunes just considering Jobs was tedious, involved in marketing spin, and specifically obnoxious to this 1 guy. People and companies (aye, major ones) carry far worse all the time. Boycotts tin brand sense, but relatively rarely compared to the number of times such bad beliefs occurs.
i think i remebered an arstechnica article (was it that? i dont retrieve) that explained in unproblematic terms how jobs does keynote better. they explained stuff similar "just write in as few words every bit possible your topic and speak. if yous wrote a paragraph on screen, why would anyone hear you lot repeat that?" and other stuff like using a manifestly background instead of fancy things.
i would beloved to revisit that only sadly i take been unable to find it
At that place was an entire volume on Jobs' presentations chosen Presentation Secrets of Steve Jobs by Ruby Gallo. Perchance Ars wrote a review and summarized some of the top points?
Guy Kawasaki has also written quite a bit nigh effective presentations and has a 10/xx/30 rule. Ten slides, twenty minutes, xxx point font. The idea of putting equally few words as possible on a slide sounds similar a Kawasaki matter.
Watching yesterday's keynote, I couldn't help but notice the "homogenized diversity" that'due south become a mainstay of Apple's post-COVID product announcements. Even though in that location were folks from all cultures (which is great), their paw gestures and discussion accent were unusually uniform.
I'd love to see a glimpse of the presentation skills class they probably have through Apple University.
I recall a lesson from years ago almost presentations, this was in a armed services context, that either y'all tin can do the talking or the slides can do the talking. Pick one, don't try to do both.
I one time read somewhere that we simply have i language eye in the encephalon, and thus can't read and mind simultaneously, so those text-laden slides basically exercise nothing but provide a distraction; y'all're alternate between listening and reading, at that place is no such thing equally doing them both at once.
In that location may be some room for providing illustrations, but bullet indicate presentations really do far more than harm than good.
Information technology depends on the purpose of the presentation.
A marketing slide or a visual adjutant to a spoken language should be every bit light in prose as possible. But it is valid to apply slides as chief data delivery mechanisms with the speech as a complement.
Right, simply since you can't actually listen to the speech communication as yous read the slides (or read the slides as y'all listen to the speech), then the slides really should be a complementary booklet or some other written text intended to be read at a unlike time.
Shhh, if you point that out, people will start questioning whether they need a slide presentation at all.
I tend to view 'no aids' as the default; unless I tin can come with a specific use for a slide deck, why make one?
Slides are perfectly fine and readable if you only talk near content on the slide. Just brand simple bullet points that are reiterated in your speech and continue information technology on topic
Very much so.
I just designed a presentation for a Zoom talk I'thou doing, and its intended use case is not only that I'll be going through information technology during the talk, merely that printouts will exist bachelor, and the handout/resource volition be available digitally perpetually.
Since the presentation involves complex, easily confused topics (voting enquiry), being very specific is necessary in this example.
Marketing a product or making an argument require different types of presentations than education. Each can be done well or poorly.
I actually sent it to them both ways (I just consider it bones good practice since I have a background in accessibility; presentation + some course of 'simply text' is my default)!
Which is fun, because there's notes and then Truthful Notes(TM) with all my terrible jokes.
1 do good of slides that largely duplicate the aforementioned content that was in the talk is that if they are made publicly available, and then you can go back over them if you lot forget/weren't there/learn better through reading/etc. Of course, the same is true for transcripts, just noone makes transcripts and everyone makes slides.
I've met at least two people in my lifetime who had 2 or three linguistic communication processors in their brain. They could type unrelated sentences while listening/speaking in a unlike conversation.
That's not me, though - I tin can't even finish typing a word I've thought of if I'm trying to listen to someone talk or say something to them at the same time. I have 1 language processor at the all-time of times.
This is how you do presentations if you're someone that spent some time learning how to exercise presentations. It doesn't take Steve Jobs. The better lecturers know that.
The matter well-nigh writing every bit few words every bit possible on the slide isn't unique to Jobs. I've been teaching that to my students for 20 years or more. I got information technology from a book( well, more like a booklet. it is really sparse with tons of pictures) called Salve Our Slides.
I think sitting in a short session at a minor UK university, virtually presenting, in 2002. The primary message was to keep the audience'south attention on you, non the screen. In many ways it was stating the obvious, only it'due south true that few people ever terminate and reason about these things.
To this twenty-four hour period, the few tips I picked upwardly in that giddy piffling session still make me a much better presenter and slide-maker than 99% of my colleagues, easily downwards, and I'm really non bragging.
> writing every bit few words as possible on the slide
that's something I learned at university, though I don't remember if it was explicitly told in form or something I picked up when preparing presentations
I call back this works effectively in many situations (particularly keynotes), only I frequently give presentations that are (one) meant to inform more than than persuade or entertain, (two) are ofttimes given to an audience with a substantial fraction of non native English speakers, and (3) the slides are regularly distributed after the fact. This pretty much necessitates having texty slides that I take to read more than or less verbatim, even if that makes the experience more than dull.
I worked at AT&T in the late 1990s on an early on music sales (not streaming) service called a2b Music. It sounds ridiculous now (why would AT&T call up they could succeed in consumer-facing music sales!) but at the time they were a co-owner of the AAC patents and wanted to commercialize them. They also had lots of bandwidth and idea this made sense.
Existence "responsible" folks (and also having no option in the matter) AT&T bent over backward to adapt the labels. Half the production was proprietary DRM that made everything constantly unusable. Despite this, the labels still strangled united states by limiting what we could sell. Apple quite correctly ignored all of this and solved the problem past outset launching the iPod, waiting until it had critical mass (much of which involved tons of unpaid MP3 downloading) and then launching the iTunes Shop in 2003 when they had an installed base total of piracy - and the major labels had no choice but to join on their terms. (Patently I compassion the small labels who got screwed in the dynamic.)
I call back about this a lot when people complain about cryptocurrency or Uber/Lyft evading regulations or destroying legacy businesses. Often this kind of behavior is bad, oftentimes the footling guy gets crushed. But at the end of the day, legacy businesses actually are poison and much of the awfulness could be avoided if they weren't trying to hold on to things so tightly.
> why would AT&T think they could succeed in consumer-facing music sales
Their customers already had the devices on them all the time for playing music, but it was still owned by AT&T (sim lock) and they had the paymen platform with the phone bill. Of course both wasn't really good and they tried to avoid whatsoever bigger investment, which made them lose. But notwithstanding it kinda made sense from a buisness perspective.
Sony bought CBS records entirely because of how the disastrous the whole DAT rollout was because of the record companies fears of consumers being able to make digital recordings at home.
Sony's MiniDisc recorder/thespian failed because of copy protection. Too bad, it was a really squeamish system for its 24-hour interval.
> and the major labels had no choice just to join on their terms.
iTunes launched with DRM. It was eliminated from 2008.
FairPlay DRM was an utter breath of fresh air compared to the DRM we were using at AT&T. There were other companies similar InterTrust competing at the time to build incredibly-restrictive powerful DRM, and despite all this crazy work (many PhDs in cryptography!) the labels kept asking for more before they would begrudgingly put a few titles on sale. FairPlay DRM was "just expert enough" to satisfy the DRM requirement while as well being pretty easy to interruption, and it remained more than or less regularly "broken" for many years. This didn't matter considering it turned out that very few people pirated content by breaking the DRM (especially when you could just rip a CD yourself.) Equally y'all pointed out, Apple eventually got rid of it.
In my after security evaluation career I saw a similar dynamic play out for other DRM companies, and even saw how corrupt the industry was. If you knew the right people or had enough market power your DRM would be "good plenty", and if not: tough luck. Technical evaluation didn't matter.
The DRM was totally reasonably. Even though it was hackable, you lot didn't actually demand to, at to the lowest degree in my use cases it was fine.
I contrast that with some phone I bought earlier that supported some number of songs (nightmare), with zune (nightmare). Apple picked a level of lockdown that I'd estimate for 80% of users didn't interfere. That compares to the other foks dramatically.
and allowed you to stream your whole library to, well, pretty much anyone.
early on iTunes was pretty slick, in my opinion. We had then many shares streaming in the office. people curated playlists and clicked that share button. loved it.
Yeah information technology had a lot compared to the residuum. Also probably the simply 1 of those services where you can still play your collection.
That's a weird takeaway. My takeaway is that content is male monarch. Content has tilted our whole legal system to its advantage, and the transition to digital has made it worse. It is anti-consumer, anti-competition, anti-innovation, anti-backer.
I was also in one case dissed by Steve Jobs at a keynote!
Back when widgets first came out for OS X I was in higher and was offset to learn programming. I was sill very bad, simply these widgets interested me because they were essentially only lilliputian HTML/CSS/JS webpages. I looked around and saw at that place was no widget for CNN news.
CNN had RSS feeds of their news, I constitute some other widget that displayed an RSS feed and basically just plugged this new information source in and it worked! Next I but restyled it to look like information technology the CNN website which at the fourth dimension was calorie-free blueish and pretty ugly, but I made this widget to lucifer.
I released information technology, and it got some downloads! Months later at the WWDC keynote, I was watching live and I saw Steve sit down at the demo computer and testify off some widgets on the big screen. The CNN widget I made was at that place on screen at the keynote! I didn't believe information technology at first, I was in stupor. Adjacent though, when he showed my widget his simply annotate was that "it's non as nice looking equally [some other news widget] but information technology gets the job washed."
Ouch! Not only was Steve Jobs personally enlightened of a piece of software I (kind of) wrote but he demoed it at WWDC! But he also said it looked pretty bad... And he was correct, it did.
Shortly later on this I restyled the widget to look squeamish on its own, regardless of what the CNN website actually looked similar. While this stung, it was a good design lesson to acquire. Thanks Steve!
> I flew home that nighttime, posted my coming together notes on my website, emailed all of my clients to announce the news, and went to sleep.
>When I woke, I had furious emails and voicemails from my contact at Apple.
>"What the hell are y'all doing? That coming together was confidential! Have those notes off your site immediately! Our legal department is furious!"
Wait, who the hell posts meeting notes on their website (and also emails all their clients without a written confirmation at the said meeting)? I would assume whatever meeting you lot'd have with a client/potential would be assumed to be confidential. I felt this particular move was very unprofessional on the OP'southward function.
A meeting with a hundred of your closest friends isn't a meeting, much less a private coming together, it's a public proclamation. Possibly if all of those hundred are your employees you lot could consider it individual, but bold it wouldn't leak would exist naïve. Apple wanted a couple weeks head offset on Rhapsody and Napster, and they fucked up and forgot to inform their guests that the announcement was under wraps. There's not more to it.
Right. More than that, you lot become NDAs signed earlier the meeting. I've never known this to not be standard do. At least when the person yous're talking to doesn't take a greater leverage in the meeting—only and then you naturally restrict what y'all say under such a circumstance. This sounds like kittenish behavior on the role of Apple, just honestly when I've never been able to modify the snooze time on the alarm app, that is what I expect. If I were CD Babe, I would have never gone back to that, as long term you've got greater leverage when all the competitors are getting access. In fact, I would have doubled down and paid developers to start working on iPod compatibility for the competitors.
Because it concerned my clients — the musicians.
Apple says "we want to sell all of your clients' music now".
I post something on the visitor blog, read mainly past my clients, saying Apple wants to sell your music now.
In all honesty, your slashdot post contains massive corporeality of proprietary Apple information that was disclosed to you, valuable statistics, Apple's business programme and what not. This was at the time when Apple tree was vulnerable and much bigger competitors could have easily eaten their lunch. I can't believe they had no NDAs. I think the original commodity is bit 1 sided story.
If there were no NDAs, every single bit of that "proprietary information" was public information.
Are you seriously appealing to sentimental sympathies right now? Apple is and was an entirely for-profit entity whose vendors are likewise. And we're supposed to extend one another sympathy? There are limits to professional person courtesy.
If Apple was so vulnerable, failing to get attendees to sign NDAs was just more astringent incompetence of the kind that made them vulnerable. Information technology's not someone else's job to babysit them.
It's odd that they forgot to brand y'all sign something. I wonder why they played it that way.
Merely let'due south say that they were in a rush and forgot. And so, why the acrimony when an apology and a sincere request would take been merely every bit good.
And why was Jobs such a dick nearly it subsequently?
To me, information technology seems that he was angry that someone was making money off the artists before he was.
If a deal is inked, you can mail, but fifty-fifty so normally you'd cheque in near messaging. I recall you were just super pumped :) merely it'due south nevertheless a imitation pas.
I guess it depends whether OP fabricated their service as startup looking for a great exit, or a passion project based on their hobby that got extended to their friends.
Personal or business concern information technology doesn't matter. If y'all met your friend for java and they told yous they are pregnant (for instance) would you feel emboldened to post on Twitter congratulations without even asking her if she wants the world to know?
I get that this was 2003 only if anything information technology would have seemed even more than rude before social media made posting nigh your life online more acceptable.
But to use your analogy, if my friend invited a few hundred people she knew and told us she was pregnant, so yeah, I would experience fine posting nearly it on Instagram.
The difference is that the pregnancy doesn't touch on the lives of all the people on Twitter. This guy was communicating with his clients, who had to respond to the news past working to prepare their albums for upload to iTunes. He had a perfectly legitimate reason for posting this on his website.
It was a meeting most a new service/product relevant to the services he provides his clients. It doesn't seem that weird, especially if he saw his responsibleness to then to be similar to that of a level or amanuensis.
Wow! Thanks for finding this! I'1000 so glad someone saved it.
(I'm the original author.)
If I empathize the article correctly, are (some/about) files for sale on the iTunes store taken from CD rips rather than made straight from the masters?
That sounds impressively sketchy; anyone who has used AccurateRip can probably prove that CD ripping errors and manufacturing errors are surprisingly common.
At the fourth dimension, the CD was oftentimes the practical chief. Many recordings had come from analog record, sent to a mastering house, who burned the last master to a CD.
Anyhow, I skipped this item in the original commodity, but Apple let go of the requirement to employ their special "put the CD in the drive" tool. We were able to deliver using master WAV/FLAC files, converted to their AAC requirements, and uploaded.
Yeah, I was on the other stop of this at the time and had a bunch of those aureate colored CDs labeled Chief for each album
Yeah I was going to say, surely you did not stop up ripping 200,000 CDs in a couple of weeks
If they hadn't, surely there was a scriptable method that didn't involve re-ripping?
Or I guess you lot might have been able to do a scriptable method that does involve re-ripping.
That is, stick a CD-RW in the bulldoze, and write a programme that would:
(one) Erase the CD-RW, then burn one anthology's worth of WAV files to it. (Ideally, practice it accurately similar with a cue canvass file.)
(2) Drive the Apple software'south GUI (using AppleScript?) to enter the track metadata, re-rip, and upload.
(3) Echo until done.
If something ejects the CD-RW, that might mess up the automation. Some drives will pull the CD back in if the tray or disc bumps into something while ejecting, so maybe a strategically-placed heavy object is enough.
Note that this is from the early days of iTunes--things could exist radically different behind the scenes now.
I suspect if information technology isn't listed as 'Apple Lossless' or one of the other fancy labels, its probably originally from a CD rip somewhere. I know from listening to niche-y music, that music catalogs can often be incorrect and will be published to multiple music sites. For case Junior Brown's album 'Junior Brownish: Greatest Hits' has a track on it that is one-half glitches AND its the exact same on multiple services and has persisted for years even though I reported information technology several times on each service. There'south also a sea shanty album where half the tracks are static. I reported it to iTunes and Amazon and received boilerplate responses. I and then sent an email to the actual ring (difficult to believe, but its a bunch of quondam guys) and they contacted their tape company...but even they couldn't go it straightened out.
Even when it lists Apple Lossless, there can still be errors in the files.
I found an album from 2001 on Apple Music recently and discovered one of the tracks cuts out at but after one minute, fifty-fifty though Discogs reports the track should exist iv minutes 30 seconds (Slide - Closure (Lounge-Tech Mix), on the Nu Progressive Era compilation: https://www.discogs.com/master/90383-Red-Jerry-Nu-Progressiv...). The album is listed equally "Apple Lossless".
I went and bought the original CD version Only to have that ane track in total.
"Mastered for iTunes" is the tag that means someone really listened to it. (Technically it means the AAC file was checked that information technology doesn't have more clipping after encode than before information technology. There'southward a public PDF about this out at that place somewhere.)
It's commonly missing, merely hopefully someone listened anyway.
Back in the early 2000s, I worked for a company that was supplying sound media to Apple, Spotify, etc. and yeah, the record companies would ship them boxes of CDs for ripping, cover scanning, track listing inputting, etc. For some of the companies, it was the but way they had - they didn't have the metadata or cover art in easy digital grade, masters available, etc., peculiarly for older stuff.
Yes. I was initially in charge of getting all the music from all the major and indie labels into our organization when I worked at what was the biggest competitor to iTunes in Europe. Information technology was 100% from CD. I call back at the finish nosotros had a storage unit of measurement with hundreds of thousands of CDs. Nosotros had teams of young girls and guys working twenty-four hour period in, day out ripping CDs.
Nosotros did our absolute all-time to go the high quality rips nosotros could. We sabbatum on the forums and figured out what the all-time CD-ROM drives were, even if it meant buying actually expensive SCSI versions.
But none of the labels had anything in digital format in prior to 2003. I think the majors only started their conversions of their catalogs in nigh 2004 or 2005.
Merely some other background I'll throw out in that location - the company I worked at opened all the doors at most of the record labels. Nearly weren't ready to sell their stuff online (WTF) and needed a lot of persuasion. Later we got them to sign, Apple would follow us in days or weeks later and take a dainty easy task. That was how we found out Apple was trying to build a music store of their own.
And Apple tree had a expert fourth dimension with the labels. At that fourth dimension, and peradventure even now, most record labels used Macs for practically everything they did, even admin stuff. And so when nosotros went in with a more often than not-PC demo, they looked at us sideways. Apple could slide in with shiny stuff and print them more :)
@sivers: Did we take all your catalog? This was OD2 (On Demand Distribution) in the UK. I take a feeling we did?
It was probably the fastest way at the time to build up their initial itemize quickly; for masters or the best quality recordings, they would need some way to go the music from the masters into the software, and I don't believe Apple had any good audio in ports.
I do recall at some point they had a headphone jack that likewise supported optical, but don't quote me on that.
Anyway, it would have been better if they had an app that accepted .wav files or something like that.
They could have easily hired a specialized company to receive masters and ship them digitized versions. They weren't every bit ludicrously opulent equally they are today, merely they were even so a pretty wealthy and assisting company.
Merely why pay, when you tin get your own vendors to practise it for free after a picayune song and dance past the Jobster? That's much more Apple tree.
The iPod helped save Apple. IIRC information technology, even more than than the iMac, helped render them to profitability.
> I do remember at some bespeak they had a headphone jack that likewise supported optical, but don't quote me on that.
They used to on the Macbook Pro laptops (I accept one). Not sure if information technology's nevertheless a matter with the new Pro.
In Apple Music today they betoken if the rail is lossless and if it'southward taken from a chief. I believe that lossless studio master rips are 24-fleck / 192 kHz (CD is 16-fleck / 44 kHz).
The originals are whatever the creative person has. There isn't going to be a standard, peculiarly for indie music, and there'southward nothing magical about 24-chip/192khz that makes it a good format.
CD quality is already perfect, impossible for a homo to hear any improvement on. Except of course that it's only available in stereo postal service-mix.
>> anyone who has used AccurateRip can probably testify that CD ripping errors and manufacturing errors are surprisingly mutual.
CDs have significant fault correction codes then if it sounds right it IS right. Having said that, I accept 1 song I always skip because it ripped badly and I've never got around to re-ripping it and replacing the bad ane. Merely it'southward obvious that it's a bad rip to the indicate that I skip the song and then I don't have to hear the glitch.
In other words, if they checked each vocal earlier uploading information technology would be fine.
> CDs have pregnant error correction codes and so if it sounds right it IS right.
For data CD formats, yes. For audio CD formats, readers are immune to interpolate over uncorrectable errors (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C2_error), which would non necessarily event in an abrupt skip or popular.
>and so if it sounds correct information technology IS right
No, player will interpolate samples with detected simply uncorretable errors. Uncorrectable error rate of CD-DA was deemed too high for CD-ROM, thus it uses additional layer of ECC data on height of information technology.
> Having said that, I have ane song I e'er skip because it ripped desperately and I've never got around to re-ripping it and replacing the bad ane.
Heh. I take one that has well-nigh five seconds of silence, at the end of an album, then about ten seconds of horrifically loud dissonance. It still catches me off baby-sit every time, only it's not in heavy rotation and so I still haven't gotten around to trimming it.
I wonder if this is why there is a Dinosaur Jr vocal with a massive bad-rip hole nigh two-thirds in, on all the streaming platforms.
Article was written in 2010 about events that took identify in 2003 or so. Seems similar a strange arroyo fifty-fifty so but I don't know much well-nigh music distribution dorsum then, or now for that matter.
It's not clear to me if that is still actually the example.
Seems likely some are but as their system presumably grew more automated I'm guessing that's not so much the instance anymore? Maybe?
Definitely not, there's a specific website for uploading stuff, information technology's non done trough iTunes. If you're a musician or a small characterization y'all're gonna employ something similar CDBaby or DistroKid though, which uses an API or something equivalent.
I imagine it hasn't been the case for any new or remastered music added in at least the last ten years. They upgraded to 256 kbps in 2009 so CD-originated music surely would have ended by then.
This is why would always dump the CD to an ISO file then mount that and rip directly from the virtual CD.
That is factually incorrect. An ISO9660 is a filesystem on a data CD. An Audio CD is merely a stream of bits. That is why yous need to rip an audio CD, the CD player needs to transform that stream of bits into blocks of 4096 bytes. It has to remember where the previous block ended and the next block starts. For many years, you had to buy a luxury brand like Plextor to be certain that ripping process would happen without much stuttering and gaps.
Audio CDs do accept framing information (in the subchannel). However, the subchannel has no error correction (only basic error detection), and then the CD player has to interpolate across subchannel errors (which are normal and common) to figure out where information technology is, and doing that properly can get complicated.
Likewise, the audio frame size is 2352 bytes. Those correspond to 2048 information bytes for data CDs (plus extra mistake correction).
Sure, but many of the cd cloning tools at the turn of the century would name your fleck stream dumped to file with a .iso file type, not .IMG . That's what I'thou referring to. I recollect it was wondering the significant of that file format that led me to even acquire what an ISO standard was.
>The name "Audion" merely popped into my head during a shower
Not much of an electronics history buff, I gauge. Also the name of (arguably) the nigh important electronics invention of the beginning half of the 20th century.
deForest .. a man out of time.
So there was Basic. And Forrest Mims guides at RadioShack!
SoundJam definitely had the better proper name though.
Spinning fewer available songs equally an advantage is some high level bullshitting. Specially when yous immediately get out and get all those "edited" tracks.
You're talking most the company that publicly extolled their own "courage" when they removed the headphone jack from their phones.
Which was pitiful. If they had said "this makes your telephone last 5 minutes longer when it gets moisture" even I would take been cautiously optimistic. Just "courage" is a stupid statement.
That said, the existent reason is they decided bluetooth headphones were finally reliable enough
That's truthful. But they were going to sell them considering they were reliable enough. For a while at that place, bluetooth headphones were a nightmare.
Bluetooth is a nightmare. My jbl little box won't grab my telephone's awesome vibes unless they touch, otherwise audio gets chopped. I'k still trying to detect my uncomplicated in-in jack which has much improve range than "touching" and will make the setup requite me less cancer.
Also to hell with cordless peripherals, my so called keyboards and pointers are all catching dust because there's an inexorable need for these picayune toxic disgusting things called batteries, and don't you dare go a twelvemonth or ii without using your computers and thus managing their piffling chernobyls! technology from Apple tree and the modern oversupply can exist trusted solitary as much as a newborn and a rattlesnake.
This is a very, very personal and subjective take.
I've literally endless bluetooth audio and non audio devices and I don't have issues with any of them.
My MBP disconnects from BT speakers several times a day. It's 2 feet abroad, both are stationary.
Apple tree is notorious for having terrible Bluetooth on their devices.
Ironically the bluetooth on my AirPods, Macbook and iPhone are miles better than any other device I used in terms of bluetooth.
I sure do beloved chasing downwardly which device my headphones are currently connected to to convince it to disconnect because I need to take a video call...
My headphones connect to whatever device is currently being used unless I tell it to otherwise.
Once again a very specific anecdotal point.
My headphones enumerate the device(s) they connect to when I plow them on. I can notice out which by simply power cycling them.
> reliable plenty
Reliable enough for what? Uninterrupted playback (disallowment from drained batteries)? Nope.
Fifty-fifty more ridiculous, on their commencement iphone they spun not having video support as a positive.
Jack removal makes sense, if going for a dust and waterproof soap bar.
My Samsung is supposedly waterproof, simply moans if I do much as exhale in the charge hole.
No, it doesn't. Information technology'southward bullshit.
There'due south stuff like the Ulefone Armor 9 FLIP rugged smartphone which has the headphone jack and has even meliorate ingress protection than the iPhone:
> the actress padding and protection that comes with an IP68/IP69K-rated, MIL-STD-810G certified outdoor smartphone
https://world wide web.techradar.com/reviews/ulefone-armor-nine-flir-rugge...
Apple tree removed the headphone jack for Airbuds and to get actress money. Their accessory division would be a Fortune 500 company, on its own.
You don't get to be a billionaire by giving money away (or not picking it up when users throw it at you).
> Apple tree removed the headphone jack for Airbuds and to get extra coin. Their accompaniment sectionalization would be a Fortune 500 visitor, on its own.
Nothing makes this read stronger than the fact that Apple yet does, in fact, offer a portable device with a headphone jack, the iPod Touch.
You tin buy an iDevice that makes calls and texts, or one with a headphone jack. You lot can not have both in the aforementioned machine.
> A 3.5mm audio connector hidden backside a flap
I'grand not saying your argument is invalid but…certain the iPhone could also have a waterproof headphone jack if we wanted port covers on it too. The phone y'all linked looks nothing like something I want in my pocket all day
The Pixel 5a has a headphone jack, is waterproof, and has no port covers. It has an actual IP rating, with all the added expense that comes with, and withal is shockingly cheap. It has a great looking design and is very close in size to a contemporary iphone.
Information technology can exist done, Apple didn't do information technology because they didn't want to.
Many many phones had waterproof headphone jacks without flaps before the iPhone vii added waterproofing like the Galaxy S5. Many still do, eastward.g Samsung A52.
> The phone you linked looks nothing similar something I desire in my pocket all day
I rather doubt most people would really exist able to tell the deviation.
I've noticed that headphone cords are the main reason that I break my telephone.
I'chiliad debating switching to non-cabled headphones to ready that and relieve money on replacement screens
> the principal reason that I break my phone.
I'm not sure whether I'm more shocked you have multiple reasons/causes for breaking your phone or that you have plenty data points bachelor that you lot tin reliably place a "main reason" among those multiple reasons.
Seriously, have yous considered taking better care of your possessions?
How the hell do cabled headphones atomic number 82 to a broken screen? I've owned quite a diversity of mobile phones over the last 23 years, take never used a instance to protect any of them, have used cabled headphones with a bunch of them, and the only ane I've broken is 1 that I deliberately dropped into a glass of vodka and coke back in the year 2000 because I was smashed off my tits and it seemed similar a practiced idea at the fourth dimension (it wasn't, even though I'd been planning to replace it anyway - in the interim the lack of a phone was a major PITA for several days).
You realize that Apple offers Apple tree just features for all its stuff, therefore pushing its own products very hard? :-)
Individual responsibility does not work against $3tn corporations.
I personally cull to not buy any Apple production, only that's non going to bring the demise of Apple tree.
So why does your personal choice have to bring the cease of Apple tree?
Did Apple get to be 3 trillion by forcing people to buy stuff or buying selling things that people were willing to requite information technology money for?
But by y'all choosing to non buy Apple Bluetooth headphones y'all have a worse feel.
> Did Apple tree get to be 3 trillion by forcing people to buy stuff or buying selling things that people were willing to give information technology money for?
A combination of the two. Certain, they had some legitimately skilful products to start with. So did Standard Oil.
Standard Oil was commodity that people needed. No one is forced to buy Apple products. It's not even what the majority of people own.
The majority didn't ain a motorcar in the Standard Oil days (and it certainly wasn't a necessity of life). But it was an aspirational thing to own, and de rigueur for those of a certain social form.
The Samsung phones are waterproof, I have seen it accidentally tested.
I love my iPhone only, I really think information technology's no coincidence the headphone jack removal coincided with the release of airpods, but over a year and a half later the purchase of beats by Dre.
>Samsung phones
Yep, an S7 went swimming with me for about half on 60 minutes one day and after a quick pat down it worked just fine. I wouldn't listen the switch away from jacks and then much if most phones & bluetooth earbuds supported higher quality codecs, simply it seems relatively rare.
I put my s7 face downwardly in snowfall and it took 24hrs or so to accept a charger. Thought the port was dead. Wireless charging could be good in that regard.
No it doesn't. The LG V35 was faster, thinner, lighter, had a headphone jack, and had the verbal same IP rating as the equivalent iPhone of the fourth dimension.
And most other high end phones followed suit. I tin can't empathize why people are and so fastened to cords. They tangle, get defenseless into stuff and are plain inconvenient.
I tin can't empathize why people are and then fastened to cords
In my case:
- 1 less battery to charge (on work trips in particular, I accept a lot of devices/equipment that need daily charging)
- no worries nigh bluetooth synching or wireless interference
- less probable to lose
- better sound quality
To each their ain.
You can't imagine how many wired headphones I've thrown away because they take gotten frayed…
Is at that place annihilation nasty in a standard wired headphone though? My impression was that basic electronics are much easier to dispose of than lithium batteries.
No, if you are worried about "eastward-waste" worrying about tiny AirPods is not the answer.
It's only like these financial gurus telling people who are deep in debt to cutting coupons to relieve $4 a week.
So why were you worried most wired headphones getting frayed a couple of posts back?
My AKG K240'due south have a standard mini XLR to iii.5mm connector. I've had to supersede it maybe in one case in the 8 years I've had the headphones
Then since you lot aren't opposed to getting an extra connector, you shouldn't have whatever consequence getting a 3.5 inch to lightning connector…
Having swappable connectors is a plus for the ability to supercede the most common point of failure on wired headphones.
Really having to bring multiple connectors everywhere and swap them out more frequently than cables neglect is a negative.
Both can be true at one time.
No, because I'd have to swap it out if I wanted to use a dissimilar device. Every bit my second paragraph ays, having to swap information technology out frequently is a downside compared to my client device having a standard socket.
The headphone has a mini-XLR to 3.5mm connector built in. If it fails it'due south easy to supplant. If the client device supports the standard 3.5mm connector it doesn't have to give a shit that the other end is XLR on IntelMiner'south headphone (or in the instance of my own headphones, 2.5mm for i set and 3.5mm for the other).
Take ameliorate care of them? Or are you lot referring to the terrible wired ones Apple used to have?
Bluetooth syncing issues? I put my AirPods in my ear and my phone immediately switched to them. I put my telephone in my pocket and switch to my iPad and the sound switches. I get a phone call and reply information technology and my phone switches back.
If my wife wants to listen to the same thing I'thou listening to, we can share the sound.
...and I tell my iphone to stop sending audio to the bluetooth speaker and it disconnects, then immediately reconnects, until I un-pair it. And when my married woman pulls into the driveway my phone telephone call unexpectedly switches to her machine. Or my headset merely announces "disconnected" in my ear in the middle of a zoom occasionally. It's positively weird how infrequently these type of things happen when you just ... plug or unplug a wire.
and today while I was making dinner and listening to music on the bluetooth speaker in the kitchen, it all of a sudden disconnected from my phone and connected to my daughter's laptop where she was playing minecraft with her friends and everyone started screaming "what's going on?!" at me at a volume loud enough for the neighbors to hear.
Until they become defenseless on something while walking effectually, running through the airport, trying to get on and off planes, etc.
There is a reason I apply Bluetooth headphones with Apple chips…
Yes, having them become caught on something is annoying, only 99.44% of my headphone use is seated at my desk, where that never happens, and where nigh of my bluetooth bug Practise happen. I doubt in my unabridged life I've ever gotten on or off an airplane or run through an airport while wearing headphones.
I don't either. I have my Beats Flex just for travel and I fly on average at to the lowest degree once a calendar month. I take them off and hang them around my neck - not continued to my phone.
But that begs the question. Has the entire industry not figured out BT headphones aside from Apple?
I think that's a fair question. My understanding is that when airpods are talking to an iphone, they are non interim as merely BT devices, but use some proprietary apple juju that'due south "improve." And I'yard sure it's better, if wirelessness is your priority. But the drawbacks and price are far also much for me. I similar being able to have all my computers, devices, mixers, and headphones exist compatible without worrying nearly software. It's just ii analog signals going through a wire, and it's easy. And as a bonus I don't have to take two carve up sets of headphones to accommodate the non-bluetooth things like my electrical piano.
My Beats Flex toll $59 - at the drome. They are probably cheaper other places. They likewise have the Apple "juju".
My AirPods Pro piece of work well nearly all the time, but notably, not 100% of the time. Everything feels like magic until the things won't pair for some reason, or at that place's minor gaps in the audio, or the case won't evidence its charge state when opening it almost the phone — and there'south nada UI or feedback to bargain with it. Information technology'south infuriating.
Lastly, I enjoyed both wired headphones AND my Airpods when I still had my iPhone 6S. The choice between wired or wireless is a faux dichotomy.
Then the solution to a trouble that didn't exist before is to buy new hardware? Seems pretty wasteful and worse, not to mention some of that hardware is a vehicle with only an AUX port.
The $10 adapter apple sells doesn't sound as good as the one they used to build into their phones, and removes inline book/play/pause controls. Non simply that, merely now I lose access to my phone'southward charging port in order to use a wired connection (Charging needed during GPS usage), unless I buy an fifty-fifty more expensive adapter — virtually of which are unreliable and have universally terrible reviews.
Macs withal enjoy the best of both worlds with wired + wireless support — including the upcoming 2022 models — and it'southward hard to deny the phone (And tablet!) experience hasn't gotten worse without the three.5mm jack.
> The $x adapter apple sells doesn't sound as proficient equally the i they used to build into their phones, and removes inline volume/play/pause controls.
? It is just as good and it supports those controls and the microphone. There's multiple standards for the inline controls on TRRS though.
It also tests ameliorate than virtually audiophile DACs.
That adapter forces one to cull to heed to music or accuse a phone, which is very problematic when using GPS, as it'southward very battery intensive, especially as the phone is frequently in directly sunlight.
>Time moves on, should they also have not gotten rid of the 30 pin adapter?
Apple is still releasing new hardware with a 3.5mm port! The port is far from outdated. Once again, both wireless and wired audio coexisted nicely on the iPhone, this is a problem of their ain doing, and they've made the experience objectively worse.
We're just going to have to concur to disagree.
Apple is also releasing new hardware with multiple USB-C ports and an SD card reader. Does that mean it should also release an iPhone with all of those features?
iPhone never had SD card support, then that's a non-sequitur [Edit: Because nosotros're talking about unnecessarily deprecated features, non new ones]. And yeah, iPhone with USB-C support would be incredibly well received! Time to ditch the Lightning port asap.
It's not a non sequitur that Apple should have kept a headphone Jack on the iPhone because it is on other devices?
They did have 5 generations of phones with 30 pivot adapters.
Information technology takes a fraction of a 2d to 'pair' my wired headphones to my phone and take music start coming out. With BT I would take to charge them, turn them on, fiddle with a menu, wait for them to connect, and listen to a light-headed sound event. Fifty-fifty the tiny fade-in they add really annoys me. I like instant feedback with my devices, I like how I can experience the jack click into identify and music starts coming out with no perceptible filibuster.
I can't say I've always had a trouble with cords tangling or beingness inconvenient.
I just open my AirPods Pro example and stick the buds in my ear and sound automatically switches to my AirPods.
Even with my $59 Beats Flex, I just press a button and plough them on and they automatically pair. When they are taken out my ear and stuck together via the magnets, sound returns to my phone.
Not to mention how they seamlessly switch from my iPhone, iPad and Mac equally I change what I'one thousand doing.
Many reasons have already been mentioned, just I have some more.
Corded peripherals may exist inconvenient. In my experience though, they are usually less inconvenient than bluetooth ones. This probably varies by awarding.
Another major problem is latency. If I desire to use headphones to play a keyboard, very little latency is tolerable. Bluetooth doesn't fifty-fifty come close.
Are you playing the keyboard on Apple devices? If not, what does it have to do with Apple tree removing headphones?
They're replying to a post that said
>And well-nigh other loftier end phones followed suit. I can't empathize why people are so attached to cords
Not apple specific.
No. What is your obsession with phones? Apple tree has removed the ability to utilise wired headphones. So the wired headphones I take couldn't be used with my (hypothetical) Apple phone.
Considering the discussion is about Apple and nigh of the rest of high end phones removing the 30 twelvemonth old analog headphone jack from phones…
Yes. Ok, we've almost looped all the mode back around. In the context of talking about high end phones, this question was posed. (by yous)
> I can't understand why people are so fastened to cords.
On the assumption that you wanted to empathize some reasons people similar corded headphones, I provided some existent reasons. I employ my headphones for things other than my phone. But it would be nice to use them with the phone also.
If I'm listening to something and my phone battery is almost to die, I can just plug information technology in and keep listening. Not really an option with whatsoever Bluetooth headphones I've tried, even my gear up with a cord connecting the two doesn't allow use while charging.
If I'm listening to something and my phone is about to dice, I put it on one of my Qi chargers all around the house.
Only every bit a contrast to what they were actually complaining about, the headphones. Did yous somehow totally miss the 2nd judgement?!?
Reminds me of Nintendo Seal of Quality for the NES. The uncontrolled amount of crap games coming out for Atari was the demise of the home videogame wave at that time.
Nintendo felt the need to closely control the supply of games and their quality to "guarantee" a practiced experience.
In reality that seal was cypher more than a marketing term
Nintendo with its lockout chip held an absolute stranglehold on supply of NES games that came out
The "Aroused Video Game Nerd" of the mid 2000's was proof enough that plenty of shit got shoveled out on the NES
> Nintendo with its lockout chip held an absolute stranglehold on supply of NES games that came out
Yes, not only did Nintendo possess the unilateral say-so to make up one's mind which games got published, just Nintendo was the sole manufacturer of the game cartridges.
This meant that Nintendo decided when those cartridges would be manufactured, and set up an upper limit on the quantity. (Plus, they required you to pay for the manufacturing in advance.)
The fact that they controlled the manufacturing schedule meant that they might delay your cartridges if they had a get-go-party game in the pipeline which might compete with yours.
"The Reality Distortion Field is already at max capacity, captain!"
"I don't care, We Need More!"
Or yesterday, when they claimed that buying a $4000 Mac Studio advances social justice. That must accept been the most tortured attempt at checking off that box I've seen in a while.
> "Lamentable, you lot need to employ this software; there is no other fashion."
That's your cue to fix mitmproxy (or the 2003 equivalent?) and figure out how to talk to the service directly.
Hearing this story makes my heart eddy in rage. Is only way to achieve truthful success is by being ass Like Jobs ? If you have read annihilation about him by accounts of people who know him, You will know that he prepared that speech to spite on Sivers. Once his ego was satisfied later on Sivers had to refund the money he then gave a go ahead for deal. In that location is no benefit of doubt about it.
> "Whatever. Fucking Apple tree."
Should take concluded correct in that location and dropped the mic.
Refunding the $xl was the correct move and in keeping with CD Baby'southward ethos of the artist comes start.
And now he's dead in large office due to his ain arrogance. Looks like you got the terminal laugh!
Steve Jobs sure was an asshole.
Says a lot that a man who has been dead for over a decade still generates content worthy of the HN forepart page.
He dissed him and used it as an opportunity to glorify the labels. At the time Jobs was trying to cozy up to them.
Smart but a dick movement nonetheless.
12 years subsequently, does anyone accept any boosted perspective on this? The story didn't make much sense to me. Especially the stop where they went ahead and uploaded the music to Apple anyway. Why would they practise that? If someone treated me the way Apple treated CD Baby, I wouldn't put up with that level of abuse.
It was an case of Steve being Steve: he wanted their back catalog but he too wanted to excerpt a pound of mankind for their perceived slight more. He had absolutely no trouble doing or saying things that put partners (such as the Motorola Rokr presentation a couple years afterward) or fifty-fifty employees (the time he indirectly joked almost getting rid of Tony Fadell on stage) in a bad light/spot. Not saying he didn't ofttimes have a point, but he did it in a way that ofttimes came off as piffling and vindictive. In this case, he probably knew exactly where Apple was heading re: the music business and also probably viewed CD Baby as a competitor to be taken out, and then there was that aspect to information technology as well.
While I don't remember they've been (every bit) vindictive at a corporate level since Steve, Apple as a visitor has been yanking 'partners' around similar this whenever they had the power to for at least the last 15-twenty years, depending on the manufacture.
His responsibility is primarily to enabling his clients (the musicians) to make money from selling their music. Regardless of his feelings Apple was offering a sales channel for his musicians.
CD Infant was the biggest independent music distribution channel at the time (I have to epitome its been surpassed past Bandcamp now?) and iTunes was very clearly going to be one of the biggest markets available.
Getting the hundreds of thousands artists that utilise your service banned from iTunes considering someone was rude would've been a really terrible business organization decision.
I don't think the artists would be happy to miss the opportunity to be on iTunes just considering Jobs was tedious, involved in marketing spin, and specifically obnoxious to this 1 guy. People and companies (aye, major ones) carry far worse all the time. Boycotts tin brand sense, but relatively rarely compared to the number of times such bad beliefs occurs.
i think i remebered an arstechnica article (was it that? i dont retrieve) that explained in unproblematic terms how jobs does keynote better. they explained stuff similar "just write in as few words every bit possible your topic and speak. if yous wrote a paragraph on screen, why would anyone hear you lot repeat that?" and other stuff like using a manifestly background instead of fancy things.
i would beloved to revisit that only sadly i take been unable to find it
At that place was an entire volume on Jobs' presentations chosen Presentation Secrets of Steve Jobs by Ruby Gallo. Perchance Ars wrote a review and summarized some of the top points?
Guy Kawasaki has also written quite a bit nigh effective presentations and has a 10/xx/30 rule. Ten slides, twenty minutes, xxx point font. The idea of putting equally few words as possible on a slide sounds similar a Kawasaki matter.
Watching yesterday's keynote, I couldn't help but notice the "homogenized diversity" that'due south become a mainstay of Apple's post-COVID product announcements. Even though in that location were folks from all cultures (which is great), their paw gestures and discussion accent were unusually uniform.
I'd love to see a glimpse of the presentation skills class they probably have through Apple University.
I recall a lesson from years ago almost presentations, this was in a armed services context, that either y'all tin can do the talking or the slides can do the talking. Pick one, don't try to do both.
I one time read somewhere that we simply have i language eye in the encephalon, and thus can't read and mind simultaneously, so those text-laden slides basically exercise nothing but provide a distraction; y'all're alternate between listening and reading, at that place is no such thing equally doing them both at once.
In that location may be some room for providing illustrations, but bullet indicate presentations really do far more than harm than good.
Information technology depends on the purpose of the presentation.
A marketing slide or a visual adjutant to a spoken language should be every bit light in prose as possible. But it is valid to apply slides as chief data delivery mechanisms with the speech as a complement.
Right, simply since you can't actually listen to the speech communication as yous read the slides (or read the slides as y'all listen to the speech), then the slides really should be a complementary booklet or some other written text intended to be read at a unlike time.
Shhh, if you point that out, people will start questioning whether they need a slide presentation at all.
I tend to view 'no aids' as the default; unless I tin can come with a specific use for a slide deck, why make one?
Slides are perfectly fine and readable if you only talk near content on the slide. Just brand simple bullet points that are reiterated in your speech and continue information technology on topic
Very much so.
I just designed a presentation for a Zoom talk I'thou doing, and its intended use case is not only that I'll be going through information technology during the talk, merely that printouts will exist bachelor, and the handout/resource volition be available digitally perpetually.
Since the presentation involves complex, easily confused topics (voting enquiry), being very specific is necessary in this example.
Marketing a product or making an argument require different types of presentations than education. Each can be done well or poorly.
I actually sent it to them both ways (I just consider it bones good practice since I have a background in accessibility; presentation + some course of 'simply text' is my default)!
Which is fun, because there's notes and then Truthful Notes(TM) with all my terrible jokes.
1 do good of slides that largely duplicate the aforementioned content that was in the talk is that if they are made publicly available, and then you can go back over them if you lot forget/weren't there/learn better through reading/etc. Of course, the same is true for transcripts, just noone makes transcripts and everyone makes slides.
I've met at least two people in my lifetime who had 2 or three linguistic communication processors in their brain. They could type unrelated sentences while listening/speaking in a unlike conversation.
That's not me, though - I tin can't even finish typing a word I've thought of if I'm trying to listen to someone talk or say something to them at the same time. I have 1 language processor at the all-time of times.
This is how you do presentations if you're someone that spent some time learning how to exercise presentations. It doesn't take Steve Jobs. The better lecturers know that.
The matter well-nigh writing every bit few words every bit possible on the slide isn't unique to Jobs. I've been teaching that to my students for 20 years or more. I got information technology from a book( well, more like a booklet. it is really sparse with tons of pictures) called Salve Our Slides.
I think sitting in a short session at a minor UK university, virtually presenting, in 2002. The primary message was to keep the audience'south attention on you, non the screen. In many ways it was stating the obvious, only it'due south true that few people ever terminate and reason about these things.
To this twenty-four hour period, the few tips I picked upwardly in that giddy piffling session still make me a much better presenter and slide-maker than 99% of my colleagues, easily downwards, and I'm really non bragging.
> writing every bit few words as possible on the slide
that's something I learned at university, though I don't remember if it was explicitly told in form or something I picked up when preparing presentations
I call back this works effectively in many situations (particularly keynotes), only I frequently give presentations that are (one) meant to inform more than than persuade or entertain, (two) are ofttimes given to an audience with a substantial fraction of non native English speakers, and (3) the slides are regularly distributed after the fact. This pretty much necessitates having texty slides that I take to read more than or less verbatim, even if that makes the experience more than dull.