-Mike

I recently read a column on the letters and blogs section of the Guardian website (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/may/22/5) about Apple and buyer’s rights. I couldn’t agree more with some of the statements:

Statement 1) As long as the purchased content is DRM-free, I couldn’t care less what other services they might offer with DRM’d content, and I would still caution anyone thinking of using them of the limitations of DRM (How Apple is changing DRM, May 15). If the price for the DRM’d service reflects its much lower value due to the DRM, then maybe it’s a nice alternative. I’ll reserve judgment until something tangible is shown. — a logical statement by username p812.com/tire

Statement 2) It’s looking more and more like analysts may be worrying too much about DRM, and not enough about whether music services were actually useful to customers. Apple’s iTunes store rose to prominence despite selling DRM’d music, and it’s grown even more dominant as competitors have started selling non-DRM’d music. If the market demonstrates that there’s an interest in subscription music services, Apple’s likely to dominate the market with its own DRM’d offering. from podcastingnews.com

Statement 3) THIS ONE I AGREE WITH WHOLEHEARTEDLY — Microsoft is one of the largest sellers of DRM technology and has screwed it up badly. Microsoft purposely killed off Windows Media Player for the Mac in an attempt to lock out Macs and iPods from Microsoft’s DRM as if they were the market leader. Making their own DRM not compatible with the iPod has proved to be a bad move. By reelsmart.com

Microsoft released a universal DRM under Plays for Sure (formerly called Janus if I’m not mistaken) they used it for both online video and music (download to own video stores using Microsoft DRM include Blockbuster’s MovieLink and the independent CinemaNow.com website. Microsoft’s own MSN Music Store that is now defunct, and all music download stores still selling Plays for Sure music are proprietors of the Microsoft Plays for Sure DRM (and have been in the past — some have stopped like Microsoft’s MSN Music Store only to be replaced by the more proprietary Zune). Microsoft restricted Plays for Sure purchases to working only on computers running their Windows operating system. Otherwise purchases could play on any mp3 player device of the consumer’s choosing other than the iPod — most mp3 players have had licensing done to support Plays for Sure.

I saw your recent post about Microsoft shuttering MSN Music servers this August after which point anyone wanting to reauthorize their music for playback or deauthorizing an existing computer to authorize a new one will be unable to do so.

Microsoft won’t even allow the Zune player to play Plays for Sure protected tracks. The only DRM system that works with Zune is Zune DRM. So the music from Zune store can only work with 1 device the Zune just like protected content from iTunes Store only works with iPods, iPhones and Apple TVs.

At the least Microsoft should allow anyone who bought Plays for Sure protected music from MSN Music Store re-download their music from the Zune Store completely free if they choose to get a Zune player.

Windows update needs to update… Windows! Which is the operating system, or the heart of the machine. As such, any update system needs to be able to update those components. But it also needs to protect against just any-ol’ piece of software from altering those core components.

IE allows the installation of ActiveX components to facilitate this. Unfortunately, as cool a technology as ActiveX is, the bad guys have corrupted its use for evil purposes. This is why Opera, and Firefox, and other browsers REFUSE to allow ActiveX to be a part of their browsers. This wasn’t Microsoft’s decision. They didn’t write Opera or Firefox.

As well, pretend you’re Microsoft. If you allow a technology that can corrupt anyone’s OS into the wild, how large would your support staff have to be to handle all the calls?

For sites that won’t load in some browsers, that is the function of the website’s designer and coder. This isn’t something that Microsoft did.

Microsoft has, however, decided that IE will be standards-compliant in some areas, but in others they seem to have decided that they know better than the W3C. This makes it really difficult for site designers to make websites that work on all browsers. Microsoft should be chided for this. It’s not anticompetitive, in my opinion, but it is going against what is most likely best for everyone.

I don’t mind IE doing more… but it should do everything that the other browsers do in exactly the same way.

-Mike

Microsoft have abused their position.

Not enough has been done to stop them.

And Linux is best

10 years ago, Win98 with Intel Chip is cheaper, faster and can do far more (both hardware and software) than MacOS9 with PowerPC chip. There are plenty of hardware addon for PC, but virtually nothing for Mac. There are plenty of software, especially quality freewares for PC. For Mac, every software cost money and it’s not just shareware price-range. It’s expensive and often far less capable than those for Windows that cost next to nothing! It was a frustrating experience to try to do anything else on a Mac beside standard design work using Adobe and Macromedia software. The only advantage is stability and good quality display.

For MacOSX, it cut all ties with MacOS9. It’s a completely new OS that don’t have to remain compatible with the old inefficient and buggy codes.

It’s a miracle that Windows works because there are just too much hardware to support. Not to mention that it has to be remain compatible with MS DOS, containing codes that are almost 30 years old. Windows is really a mess for programmers to build on.

Today, MacOSX has plenty of freewares, as good as Windows. More support from hardware manufacturers. Well detailed and stable design, with hardware and software complementing one another. Now with the ability to also run Windows, I will get a Mac if that’s the only computer I could buy.

Microsoft used to compromise too much security for convenient sake. Today they have complete done the reversed. Vista compromise too much of convenient for security sake. It’s a frustration just to click approval of permissions for every little things I do. I wrote a very bias review about Vista here (so don’t read it if you can’t take my bias) : http://bhwong.multiply.com/reviews/item/44

Cheers,
Boon Hong.

I have many setups in my place. I have no fewer than 7 Windows PCs (one running Vista Home Premium). I also have one Linux box (Ubuntu, even though that PC won’t boot right now) and 2 Macs (Mini and 15″ Macbook Pro). I have the Macbook set to dual-boot between Tiger and Vista Ultimate and also use Parallels (an awesome product) to access the Vista partition when I don’t need to give Windows the whole machine.

Well, actually that’s not true. The Macbook was my mobile gaming platform, which I used the Windows partition for. But since I am not traveling anymore, I got a new computer for gaming (the Vista Home Premium machine). So I took the Vista partition off the Macbook.

Which wasn’t easy. Boot Camp is now no longer a free beta, so they are charging for it, which means I couldn’t use it to restore the entire drive to OSX. I couldn’t find my OSX CD (man, my place is a mess) and even so I think I would have had to destroy the OSX partition to resize it.

So I used RSYNCX to copy the OSX partition to an external drive. Then I rebooted onto that drive (you can’t partition the drive that’s running the OSX that’s in memory) so that I could repartition the main drive. I did that and then used RSYNCX to copy the system back to the main drive. Worked like a champ.

I may use the Macbook Pro as my night-time TV watching computer (just before bed) since I can stream anything from my Mac Mini wirelessly. It would also be a great place to have it for any last-minute surfing I do before going to sleep.

As for Amazon buying Audible… well, I don’t have an opinion on that just now. I don’t use Audible, although I hear it’s a great place to get audio books. But I have plenty of stuff to listen to — podcasts and music — as well as plenty of content to watch — podcasts and TV and movies — so I really don’t need MORE content to consume.

My bet is that Audible will be available on the Kindle soon, if it isn’t already. I do hope, however, that they don’t remove iPods/iTunes as viable Audible content players.

-Mike

Windows can be run on all sorts of hardware provided its x86 based (Intel, AMD etc although some IBM PCs have run Windows and continue to do so today — these aren’t computers with IBM chips but just PCs by IBM that may still have an Intel or AMD microprocessor) from various manufacturers (think HP,, Dell, Gateway (now owned by Acer), Acer, Sony, Toshiba, Lenovo, Intel, IBM etc) whereas Mac OS X is restricted to Apple only branded computers using hardware of Apple’s choice.

Then there is Sun’s Solaris which can run on different configurations as well and on top of that FreeBSD, the now defunct BeOS (that’s rumored to still be in development but under another name), NetBSD etc. There are mobile OSes from Palm, Symbian, Microsoft and now even Apple. Smartphones running Microsoft’s Windows Mobile software, the Palm OS software and Symbian software, Nokia and Motorola based phones as well as Blackberry phones and even iPhones by Apple (with iPhones running a mobile Mac OS — that iPod Touch also uses) at some point it gets too confusing to keep up with the various features each company offers in their products.

For consumers that want to migrate away from Windows but keep their PCs that need a good desktop OS — unless they switch to a Mac computer the next best choice is Linux but on the desktop Linux has not been that successful to date and there are too many distros to choose from. I wish a good OS alternative to both Windows and Mac OS would emerge for the desktop users that want to dump Windows but keep their PC (i.e. not switch to Mac) which does not have too many distros — just 1 OS that may have newly released versions or updates at least every few years — if not once a year.

Your right by the way I don’t agree either with that other article’s statements — like someone not being able to do something on a Mac because the user is an idiot is indeed a ridiculous claim.

I was just sharing an article I was reading. what do you think of Amazon.com buying Audible? I just found an article saying Amazon buys Audible (Too bad it wasn’t Apple”)

http://blogs.computerworld.com/amazon_buys_audible_too_bad_it_wasnt_apple

Well, duh.

The comment about not being able to do something on a Mac is just because the user is an idiot was way off-base. There are tons of applications that are, thus far, PC-only. But I think that Macs have made enough of an inroad into the computer-using lifestyle that we will see fewer and fewer applications that are only for PCs.

Like I’ve said before, I enjoy both for different reasons. Some things I do on a Mac (rip DVDs, use iTunes, keep my photos, play movies and podcasts) and some things I do on PCs (file servers, email server, web and FTP servers, record television, backup nexus, Office apps, play games).

-Mike

The content of the article is different though I just thought it was interesting — am reading it now as soon as I post this comment.

As well, with lots of options comes innovation, which then propels the industry.

-Mike

I’m just saying in any market there should not be too many products to confuse consumers but there should be enough products to give them some choice. If Windows was the only operating system that would be bad for all consumers. It is a good thing there are other choices like running Linux, Sun’s Solaris, systems like NetBSD, FreeBSD, Mac OS X on Macintosh computers etc but I would not want too many operating systems overall that causes too much confusion — same goes with web browsers and other markets.

My point is that Microsoft didn’t create Windows so that other companies could benefit and profit. They created it to make money for themselves. As such, it shouldn’t be Microsoft’s main job to ensure other company’s profitability. As well, they created the OS, so they should be able to reap some benefits from that (as long as those benefits aren’t predatory).

As to your “confused consumers” idea, I have to say nay nay. Currently there are 2 main OS groups in the beige-box space: Windows and Linux (in a variety of flavors). OSX doesn’t count since that’s tied to hardware (i.e. your hardware choice dictates your OS choice with Mac). But there are many browsers out there.

So, why would you think that a reduction in browsers (i.e. making IE dominant and perhaps the only browser) is bad, but an increase to 3 or more OS choices is also bad. If more than 2 OSes will confuse consumers, then why wouldn’t they be confused about 10 or more browsers? As well, there are many flavors of Windows out there… if they’re not totally confused by that, then one more OS in the world shouldn’t put them over the edge.

See, the point is that the average consumer doesn’t know and doesn’t care. They use Windows because that’s what came on the machine. They wouldn’t care as long as they can do the things they want to do, like surfing, write emails, etc. In fact, I would wager that the average consumer wouldn’t really see the difference between Windows and other OSes, unless and until they can’t get at their favorite websites or get their email.

This is why IE dominates. The average user isn’t aware of alternatives, or else they don’t care. IE is there, so that’s what they use. Heck, the average computer user these days just calls it “the blue ‘e’”. They’re just not sophisticated in this realm.

In the end, I believe choice is good. And in the realm of the modern OS, there’s not a lot of difference unless you are into programming or gaming. I can email from a Mac to someone who uses a PC. They can email from their PC to my Linux machine. In the end, the OS doesn’t matter to 95% of what people use computers for.

To me, the issue is the security. The average user doesn’t realize that they are not safe, and then my tubes get clogged with spam and DDoS traffic and worms propagating themselves. IE has been proven to be a big gateway for hackers to corrupt machines. This is the only reason I see that it shouldn’t be used as much as it is. But as for the usability, well it works fine. I have no problem with it on that front. And I certainly don’t care what other people use for browsing the web (as long as it doesn’t affect me).

All I am saying is, let’s give credit where it’s due, while also identifying the real problems. Simply jumping on the anti-Microsoft bandwagon isn’t helping things at all.

-Mike

Even if Netscape made their own OS Windows is the dominant OS and Netscape is/was a browser a company. They made a cross platform web browser. So if Microsoft tried to make Real Player purposely incompatible with Windows for Real to make its own OS doesn’t solve anything — wait Microsoft did try to kill RealNetworks but mainly via bundling alone — Microsoft is limiting the market for Windows software to Microsoft only software. If Netscape made their own OS and pulled their browser off Windows but continued it for other platforms that would have still made IE the only Windows browser. Today there are lots of choices in web browsers but during the 1990s IE and Netscape were the only two.

For Microsoft to purposely stop Netscape from working to discourage its use and then via bundling of IE and making IE run well they force users to run IE by telling them that’s your only option in Windows for browsing the web there is no other browsers and that restricts choice to a Microsoft only browser.

It didn’t help consumers when Microsoft did this and the idea that Netscape would create its own OS then does everyone have to switch to a Netscape OS to run Netscape browser? Shouldn’t everyone be able to use it when its offered if they want? Also I’m quite sure Microsoft would have reacted to a Netscape OS with even more hostility and using blackmail, coercion and other means discourage PC vendors from installing OEM copies of a Netscape OS so consumers couldn’t buy a new computer bundled with Netscape OS — its important to note Microsoft gets most of its revenue thru sales of new computers preloaded with Windows as opposed to retail copies — Microsoft killed BeOS — if you need more info on how this happens and the complaint Be Inc filed against them for ruining its business you
can Google Be v Microsoft etc.

Microsoft was making products for the Mac even when Steve Jobs was out of Apple — Microsoft just expanded its Macintosh software efforts after the 1997 agreement was reached and reaffirmed its commitment — I don’t know if you know this but in 1996 they were offering a version of Office for Mac back then even. They have always made products for Mac — in fact the very first version of Office ever was made for Mac before appearing on Windows ultimately Microsoft just started making Windows to Mac ports of Office but were met with complaints that Mac users wanted a more Mac like application and Microsoft started working on developing Office for Mac from the ground up using Mac interfaces.

The comment about Microsoft being unfairly punished for success when they are not doing anything wrong though is justifiable. What about Apple’s Mighty Mouse? Is that not wireless?

All the peripherals for my Mac Mini are standard PC peripherals. I have a regular USB Microsoft keyboard lying around that works with Mac Mini (but am not using it because it won’t work with my BELKIN KVM Switch — I had to use an older keyboard that works with my KVM Switch with my Mac Mini but have tested the newer Microsoft keyboard and if it wasn’t for incompatibilities with my KVM Switch the Microsoft keyboard otherwise works just fine — it too is Mac compatible.

I did not have to install any drivers for my Microsoft keyboard when I did use that with Mac Mini or any drivers for my current (older) keyboard in use nor did I need to install Mac drivers for my USB mouse. I just plug everything in to my Mac Mini and it works automatically.

I’d had this great idea about a media center keyboard. Archos’ remote controls have a full keyboard in a very small size, like a cellphone keyboard. I thought it would be great to have one that also has media controls (play, pause, fast forward, etc.) as well as a small mouse trackball. Well, Logitech did it! The diNovo Mini. That might be a perfect item to have for a Media Center computer. I wonder if it will work with the Mac. It doesn’t say that it will (Windows only) but maybe a Mac driver will come out soon.

As for IE, yes, we’ve all heard the mantra “Windows ain’t done til Netscape won’t run.” I am somewhat dichotomous on this point. Sure, it’s hardly fair and very anticompetitive to make your product purposely incompatible with another company’s. But MS hasn’t done this in years, have they?

However, there is another side to that. It is, after all, Microsoft’s OS. If Netscape wants to have an OS that’s compatible, they’re welcome to create their own.

See, no one who owned, say, a Ford would claim anticompetitive practices if a part for Chevy cars doesn’t work in their Ford. So too is the nature of an operating system.

Microsoft has been too successful in saturating the market with Windows. So successful that they’ve had to invest in Apple to keep it afloat. MS needs OSX and Linux to be viable alternatives to prevent becoming a monopoly. Otherwise, if Windows were the only game in town, then pretty much anything they do will be anticompetitive.

But still, they’re being punished for their success. How fair is that?

-Mike

At least in Windows 98 that barely happened for IE but every time Netscape was launched it crashed because MS designed Windows to cause compatibility errors with the Netscape browser. Microsoft also released a Mac version of IE and got Apple to bundle it to choke Netscape’s cross platform browser business. Once Netscape was no longer a viable threat Microsoft discontinued issuing major updates of IE for Mac but they kept the Mac version available till Apple made Safari. Apple made Safari to replace the lagging IE for Mac — the Mac needed a good web browser and Microsoft was not updating Mac IE past IE 5.2.3 so Apple released Safari on the Mac and Microsoft used that as an excuse to ditch IE for Mac completely.

Apple ultimately released a version of Safari for Windows which is interesting!

Let me know if you really did it? Or are doing it soon! I plan to buy one as soon as I get a High Definition Television. I’m interested in a plasma display. Dunno what manufacturer I’ll get it from — will have to find the best deal possible to me.