The iPod backlash has begun
Instapundit got on the trolley yesterday, giving voice to proponents of the Game Boy-ish iRiver. He also links to this d-bag's ill-informed, condescending rant against the iPod, which we shall fisk presently.
In order to put music on your iPod you must use Apple's iTunes software.
Not true. When I first bought my iPod, they didn't have iTunes for Windows yet, so I was forced to use MusicMatch Jukebox. I'm fairly certain you can also use newer versions of Windows Media Player to transfer MP3s.
If you need to put music onto your iPod using a computer that doesn't have iTunes on it (which is 9,999 PC's out of 10,000) well then, tough.
Again, not true. I don't know where he's getting the 9,999 out of 10,000 figure, but even if it's true, iTunes is now available, for free, for both Mac and Windows. Just download it!
Once you get iTunes to let you put music on your iPod, it's there to stay. You can't take it from the iPod and put it on a different computer. You can delete it or you can play it, but that's it.
Once again, not true. I can't speak for Macs here, but using Windows Explorer, you can access the iPod's control system and copy and paste music files just as you would any other file. There's no system built in to either iTunes or the iPod to facilitate this, but it took me about 5 minutes to figure out this "back door" method. For a self-professed geek, this guy sure isn't very geeky.
So if, for example, you owned a computer which you used to encode all of your CD's to MP3 format, and the hard drive on that computer died with all your music still in it, you could not then restore those music files from the copy on your iPod. Why not? Because if Apple permitted you to copy music off of your iPod onto an unfamiliar computer you'd just use it to give all your music to everybody else. You are, in Apple's view, a criminal by default.
You could re-copy your music from yer iPod to yer computer using the method above. Or, since iTunes allows you to burn your music to cd, you could just re-rip it. And I hate to break it to this guy, but the courts have found that copying music outside established fair-use provisions is, in fact, illegal. If he has a problem with existing intellectual property laws, fine. I can respect that, as I have many issues with them myself. But to blame Apple for trying to obey the law or work within the confines of the system so they don't, y'know, get sued and go out of business, is asinine.
By the way, if you wanted to encode your CD's in the quality that an audiophile demands by using the free, open source Ogg Vorbis audio compression software, you're out of luck again because the iPod doesn't support Ogg Vorbis either. Why not? Ogg Vorbis is free, so it isn't because it's too expensive. It's because Ogg Vorbis has no provision for copy control, unlike some variations of MP3 and Apple's own AAC formats. As we all know, you're a criminal so you mustn't be allowed to use formats which allow you unrestricted control over your music. Audiophiles are shafted by the iPod again if trying to listen to their iPod-bound music on a home stereo. The headphone output on the iPod isn't line-level so its quality is poor for that use and, unlike it's competition, the iPod doesn't offer digital output of audio for
truly excellent sound.
God this guy is a moron. Look, Ogg Vorbis is for effing nerds with no friends or hobbies aside from doing stupid internet shit. *Ahem* But anyway, the fact is that MP3 is the standard, always has been. AAC is the next generation MP3, and sounds just fine. Yes, it has allowances in the format for copy protection, but again, this is the law, and not Apple's fault! Most music that is going to go on a portable player like the iPod or iRiver is going to ripped from CDs, which I'm sure this guy would agree have severe sound limitations on their own, and would be transferred to the ripped file regardless of which format one uses. And if you were going to play music through a home stereo, why not just play the CD? Jeez.
Anyway, you get the idea. This guy, aside from not knowing his technical shit, is transferring his dated, faux-hacker, "information should be free" rage to a device that never sought to challenge the paradigm in the first place. He also fails to mention that without the iPod, devices like his precious, toy-like iRiver would most likely never have been produced. The market for portable MP3 players pre-iPod was beholden to low-capacity flash-players, like the new iPod Shuffle. The iPod virtually created a market for high-capacity hard-drive players, as well as the market for downloadable, legal music. Also, it's not ugly.
Finally, some of you might see a dissonance in my simultaneously exploiting the Napster scam and trashing this guy for ragging on copy protection schemes. You might be right. I've not fully sussed out my feelings on the issue. Howevs, let me say in my defense that in this post I merely wish to point out the idiocy of taking offense to Apple's half-hearted embrace of copy protection and DRM in it's current form. The fact is that the laws exist, and complaining about those who follow them won't change that. If the guy is going to do criminal shit and make unlimited copies of his music, embrace it man, call it like it is, at least until they change the law. And, technically, the Napster scam might be legal, as I pointed out below.