Showing posts with label ipod. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ipod. Show all posts

Friday, October 15, 2010

iPod interface wrong for instructional video

I’ve been listening to a few instructional videos (lectures) on my iPhone lately. That’s how I came to realize that the iPod/iPhone/iTunes interface for lectures and other instructional video is backwards. We need a Podcast interface with video, but we get a video interface instead.

There are two problems. The first is we get the wrong control set. Instead of the ‘back 30 seconds’ and rewind/fast forward of the podcast UI, we get the very simple controls of the video UI. Even with the variable speed slider it’s tough to replay the last minute of material – particularly while driving. (No, I’m too old to be watching while driving, I’m just listening.)

The other problem is the interrupt behavior. Podcasts and music continue to play if you change to another app (map, GPS), but instructional video pauses. That makes sense for a movie, but it’s wrong for instructional video.

I don’t have any music videos, but I wonder if they get the iPod/iOS instructional video interface we need. If so, is there a way to convert a .mp4 based instructional video into a “music video”?

Sunday, July 04, 2010

Apple's iBookstore and a FairPlay DRM review

I'd delayed updating to iTunes 9.2, but the upgrade seems to have gone well.

I can now browse my "Protected book " (FairPlay 2) in iTunes, but of course I can't read them on my Mac. Surprisingly, I can't buy a iBooks.app "books" [1] using iTunes...
... the iBookstore is only available through iBooks on iPad, iPhone, and iPod touch at this time.
That's a curious limitation. I wonder if the publishers insisted on it. If they did, I assume it has something to do with copy protection.
 
Apple's book DRM rules are similar (identical?) to their app rules (emphases mine) ...

Books downloaded from the iBookstore can be placed on up to five computers you own that you’ve authorized with your iTunes Store account. You can sync your books to all iPads, iPhones, and iPod touches you own...

Apple says "five computers", not "five user accounts". A single computer can have a very large number of separate accounts, and each account can have a distinct iTunes account.

From past experiments I believe it is correct that Apple authorizes at the computer level, not the user level. The FairPlay DRM however is iTunes Store account specific. I don't think there's any documented limit to how many user accounts can share the same iTunes account, so in principle a single machine could have 100 iTunes accounts that could all share the same iTunes store account and thus the same FairPlay material. In turn each account can sync to an unlimited number of iDevices (I thought there used to be a limit!) -- though technically one person should "own" them. (How is that established?)

This DRM implementation means that DRMd material can be shared by a group of people so long as one person is making all the purchases ("ownership"). It's not a bad proxy for a "family of residence". So books can be shared within a family, as can music, video and apps.

It's never noted anywhere but on my blog, but this makes iPhone apps much cheaper for families than apps on other platforms (example: Wii).

The strategic impact of Apple FairPlay is underrated. It seems to suit everyone to keep it that way.

[1] Apple needs a word for the "books" that are rendered by iBooks.app.

Saturday, January 24, 2009

My Nano qualified for a $25 class action settlement

I think I got $50 back from a flaky battery in my original iPod in the form of an Apple Store coupon [1], now I'm getting (maybe, some day) $25 for Nano scratches.
Original iPod nano owners benefit from scratch settlement - The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW)

... Thanks to a now-settled class action lawsuit, nano owners who experienced the scratchies can apply for a refund of $15 (if the iPod shipped with a slip case, as later ones did) or $25 (for no-case shipments)."
It was a pain to enter the serial number at the settlement website, I found it easier to read on the internal 'about' screen than on the back of the phone. Between re-entering the serial number and re-entering the Captcha [2] it took me five tries.

You then get a printed form you have to mail in.

It's a lot of bother, and I wouldn't do it if I didn't feel that Apple has a nasty tendency to skimp on quality control. This seems to be the only way to keep them semi-honest.

[1] Much less useful than you'd imagine. It didn't work online. I think I squandered it on a 2nd generation iPod shuffle, which was (and is) a waste of money.
[2] Captchas are getting to the end of their useful lifespan; spammer neural network software is now better than humans at deciphering them. In fact, I'm soon going to have to start using that software to support my own (legitimate) Captcha entering.

Thursday, January 08, 2009

Apple's product cycles - handy for purchase planning

Phil Schiller described Apple's product cycles for David Pogue ...
Gmail - Circuits: A Strange Macworld Expo

.. the holiday season (Novemberish), the educational buying season (late summer), the iPod product cycle (October), the iLife development cycle (usually March), the iPhone cycle (June)..
So we have by month
  • March: iLife
  • June: iPhone (? and MobileMe?)
  • August: Educational (iWork? Hardware tweaks?)
  • October: iPod
  • November: holiday things - hard to know what this means
This doesn't include dates for the professional software (Aperture, etc) or for major OS releases. Since we know the iLife news (March) we have quite a period of predictability ahead.

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

New Macs won't let some video play on projectors

Old televisions, projectors, LCD panels -- they're not "HDCP" compliant. So they won't always work as expected with new Macs. Only media that enforce the DRM chain are fully acceptable (emphasis mine)...
AppleInsider | Apple's new MacBooks have built-in copy protection measures

Apple's new MacBook lines include a form of digital copy protection that will prevent protected media, such as DRM-infused iTunes movies, from playing back on devices that aren't compliant with the new priority protection measures.

The Intel-developed technology is called High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP) and aims to prevent copying of digital audio and video content as it travels across a variety of display connectors, even if such copying is not in violation of fair use laws.

Among the connectors supported by the technology are the Mini DisplayPort found on Apple's latest MacBook, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air, in addition to others such as Digital Visual Interface (DVI), High-Definition Multimedia Interface (HDMI), Gigabit Video Interface (GVIF), and Unified Display Interface (UDI).

ArsTechnica reports that Apple has apparently acquired a license for the technology and is now using it across its DisplayPort-enabled MacBook lines to to prevent transmission of purchased iTunes content to devices that don't include support for HDCP.

"When my friend John, a high school teacher, attempted to play Hellboy 2 on his classroom's projector with a new aluminum MacBook over lunch, he was denied by the error you see [below]," writes Ars' David Chartier. "John's using a Mini DisplayPort-to-VGA adapter, plugged into a Sanyo projector that is part of his room's Promethean system."

... As a licensed adopter of HDCP, Apple agrees to pay an annual fee and abide by the conditions set forth in Inte's HDCP License Agreement [PDF].

For example, the terms stipulate that high-definition digital video sources must not transmit protected content to non-HDCP-compliant receivers, as described above, and DVD-Audio content must be restricted to CD-audio quality or less when played back over non-HDCP-digital audio outputs.

Hardware vendors are also barred from allowing their devices to make copies of content, and must design their products in ways that "effectively frustrate attempts to defeat the content protection requirements."...
Gee, I wonder why the makers of Audio Hijack couldn't get permission to put their apps on the iPhone.

We know where this ends up.

We will all have little chips implanted into our acoustic and ocular nerves. The chips will decode encrypted media, which will look and sound like nonsense to the unchipped. That way every family member will pay separately for their holograms.

You think I'm joking.

Hah.

Anyone know how I can make anonymous cash donations to the bandits of Sherwood Forest 2.0?

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

See also: Palladium.

Update 11/20/08: Additional details. If Apple had provided another port they'd have been ok, but that would have ruined the vibe.

Update 11/25/08: This is partly a bug. Apple has a QT fix. The Macs were supposed to be able to output regular video to non-compliant monitors, but not HD video.

Monday, September 08, 2008

iTunes 8: what really matters is the household library – and its DRM

iTunes 8 is coming out sometime soon, maybe tomorrow.

When it does, there will be the usual array of obvious improvements, and probably a few regressions.

The interesting parts, as always, will involve digital rights management in general, and iTunes approach to household media repositories in particular. Consider the setup described by a reader of my tech blog …

Gordon's Tech: The ultimate AirTunes, iPhone Remote, iTunes setup

From Jan ...

It looks like Remote with iPhones/iPod Touch and AirTunes is the solution for for the multi-room audio setup I was waiting for years to come.

I installed several AirPort Express boxes with AirTunes in the rooms and installed 3 users on a mac mini with fast user switching on. All users have their own iTunes setup and have access to a central NAS Server with all the MP3 files. This won´t work with Windows because Windows won´t allow fast user switching running iTunes !

With this setup every family member is able to hear their music independently on different AirTunes outlets….

Yes, and every family member can have their own media preferences and their own iTunes 8 recommendation profiles. They can’t, of course, sync DRMd music or iPhone/iTouch apps to their user profiles; currently only one account owns the DRMd media and only one account can add music.

Let’s see how iTunes 8 behaves. Apple can either continue to (very, very) quietly support this arrangement, or they can make things more restrictive, or they could validate household media libraries by allowing multiple accounts to add music and supporting multiple DRM accounts in a single media library.

I wouldn’t be shocked if Apple were to ship a revision of the AirPort Extreme that supported putting the media library on the 1TB AirPort drive …

Update 8/8/08: Adam Engst (tidbits) has the same thoughts about the household library, but he says he'd be shocked if Apple announced a fix. Either way, we agree -- what matters now is the management of the media library in the multi-device multi-user household.

Thursday, August 28, 2008

Standards for chargers: Thank you China

An innocent question about organizing chargers produces and surprisingly good Slashdot discussion of power adapter standards.

Did you know China mandated USB only charging for cell phones (so is that why iPhone 2.0 dumped firewire)? Did you know there are people representing the charger industry who actively campaign against an EU standard? (Ok, so that was predictable.)

The ecology and economics of physical connector standards are fascinating; the irresistible force of consumer desire meets the immovable object of proprietary advantage and lock-in (the physical analogue of data lock). Consider the interesting examples of HP's printer cartridges, Apple's iPod connector, and the "authenticated" NEC battery.

Even though I wish the USB connector supported 12V instead of 5V, I am very grateful for its emergence as the de facto universal charger interface. I make USB charging support a very high priority -- which is why the RAZR's quasi-USB support drove me bats (yay BlackBerry, half-yay iPhone/Palm).

All very well, but what about China? This USB standardization is the kind of thing Singapore would do (smart, tyrannical), but when China does it they do it for the world -- much as California's emission standards become the North American rule.

Those anti-standard lobbyists will need bigger offices in Beijing.

Thanks China.

Saturday, August 16, 2008

iPhone remote multiple libraries - what it means

The iPhone Remote app supports connections to multiple libraries.
Macworld | iPhone Central | Remote lets you control iTunes from iPhone, iPod touch

...There is, however, support for multiple libraries. When you start up Remote after associating with a library, it’ll take a second to reconnect, during which time you can change which library you want to use (you can also tap the Settings button in the top left corner of any list screen). That’ll give you the option to add multiple libraries, delete existing associations, and toggle a “Stay Connected” preference (not precisely sure what that does at present)...
The implications are left as an exercise to the reader.

Ok, some hints:
  1. iTunes is designed for a single user. It belongs to a user account.
  2. iPod and iPhone binding is not to a user, and not to a computer, it is to a user account on a single computer. Unless everyone wants to share apps, contacts, calendar, etc a single iPhone syncs with a single iTunes library.
  3. DRM contracts are to a single user's Apple identity (formerly .mac), they can be applied to > 1 computer (the number is shrinking over time).
  4. DRM is far from dead. If the music industry succeeds in toppling Apple by allowing only Amazon to sell without DRM, then they will terminate Amazon's DRM-free privileges and assume the throne of Sauron. (You knew that, right?)
It's a complex world. Looking at the way the iPhone works, it's possible that we could move to a family account that all devices would sync to -- since iCal supports multiple calendar overlays and Address Book supports multiple subsets. Gives a whole new meaning to "all for one and one for all", a meaning of particular interest to teens.

Consequences, intended and otherwise ...

Saturday, July 26, 2008

Software-as-service and DRM mean you don't own. You rent. Everything. Another lesson from Yahoo.

This would be the third time I recall that a major vendor has shut down a DRM service and stripped customers of all their products.

AppleInsider | Yahoo! Music's death at age 3 warns of DRM's risk

... Yahoo did its best to stage a rival to Apple Inc.'s iTunes, but after three years of lagging results, the Internet icon is putting its Yahoo! Music service to rest and leaving subscribers with copy-protected music libraries that can't be transferred to new computers...

Due the vagaries of computer life, within a year much of that music will be gone. Yahoo is telling users to burn CDs from the music. Anyone who's ever tried to do this will know what an inane idea that is. It's prohibitively time consuming, and future lossy compression of that music will generally produce awful results.

When Microsoft/MSN (? or was it AOL?) did something similar I think they refunded customer money, though that only works for people with current accounts.

They key lesson is that when you buy a used CD for $3 you have access to that material for an unlimited amount of time. When you buy the same CD new on iTunes for $14 you have use until Apple closes its FairPlay servers, or until it changes your iTunes contract.

We live in an age of transience. I suspect a younger generation will simply accept this as the way things are.

Incidentally, there's a cruel surprise slowly being uncovered. A surprise, that is, to the vast majority of people who don't bother thinking about DRM.

Lots of families are going to have multiple iPhones (great phone, fascinating computer, lousy PDA, Outlook sync broken, don't touch MobileMe before November, wait for 2.1 if you can).

They'll expect they can sync all their iPhones to what they think of as the family music and video library.

Cue evil laughter.

They'll discover then that an iPhone is a personal device, and it must sync to an individual user account. They will also discover that Apple's DRMd music and videos are owned by an Apple username, not a family. Lastly, they'll discover that iTunes libraries are personal libraries, not family libraries.

Slowly they'll realize the jaws are closing around them. They need to buy a copy of each video and song for each member of the family. [1] Eventually, they'll see the shape of a BrainLocked future, where we pay to keep access to our own memories...

[1] There used to be a workaround for non-DRMd iTunes media, but I've not tested it on iTunes 7.7. Sooner or later Apple will close the door on this; my transient DRM optimism has faded. I don't think Americans are going to figure this one out. Maybe the EUs will twig to this, and put some serious laws in place.

Update: Recently Apple terminated its .Mac web page authoring tools. All .Mac web pages are now inaccessible. For a scary moment I thought Google had done the same thing with my old Google Pages. Turns out they're only close to gone. Dang, but I sure as shootin' don't trust that cloud.

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

My iPod has run out of room, so the iPhone is more appealing

Since I don't have much video on my iPod, I though 30 GB would be plenty of room. Our family music library used about 14GB, and a few videos used 3-4 GB.

I didn't reckon with Podcasts. I'm out of room now.

Ironically, this actually negates one of the relative disadvantages of my iPhone-to-be. I'm going to have be selective about what I carry, whether I use an iPod or a 16 GB iPhone.

If 30GB isn't enough, then 60 won't be either, so there's no point in trying to outpace this stuff. I just need to get used to managing the playlist sync.

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

The iPhone software advantage: strong Digital Rights Management

This is sad.

But it must be said.

I am no friend of Digital Rights Management. I don't buy FairPlay'd music -- because I can't play DRMd music on my car stereo [1].

On the other hand, I remember when there was a large selection of games and children's software for the Apple II and the original Macintosh. There's almost nothing left like that today - on XP or OS X. The CDs we bought 5-8 years ago were the last of that wave, and they no longer work on XP or 10.4 Classic [2].

There are such games today of course. They're on the Nintendo platform [3].

Why is this software on Nintendo, and yet not on OS X?

It's the Digital Rights Management. You can't give a copy of your favorite Wii game to a friend. You can't even move the games you bought at work to your home. This 21st century version of "copy protection" cannot be broken as easily as as the 1980s version.

The iPhone, like the Nintendo Wii, has very robust DRM. It will not be possible to download an iPhone app via iTunes and install it on your wife and children's iPhones and iTouchs [4].

Unlike the Palm, the iPhone and iTouch will combine robust DRM with a single contact built-in delivery mechanism for software developers willing to push through the distribution hurdles.

Guaranteed distribution. Guaranteed copy protection/DRM.

The iPhone will have a very large software advantage over the Mac version of OS X, and over the Palm and Microsoft mobile devices that have preceded it.

Ringtones were once a billion dollar industry, though that's dying now. The iPhone software advantage will be bigger.

We'll have to pay for the apps though.

I'm happy to do that. It's just too bad we need the DRM to make this work.

--

[1] Most know this, but it's worth mentioning that AAC is a format and not a DRM mechanism. AAC encoded music plays on our SONY car stereo and our Nokia and Blackberry phones).

[2] 10.5, of course, doesn't support Classic on any platform, so when our G5 iMac dies so will all our old favorite children's apps. My son collects the old CDs in his desk drawer, hoping, perhaps, that they'll one day come to life again.

[3] It is odd that no other game platform seems to have realized that teen players come from children players, and yet they don't provide entry level game software. Maybe the execs don't have children?

[4] On OS X and Vista there is a strong tie between a hardware device and a user identity. Each device must sync to a single account on a single machine, though Apple has screwed up the software/hardware/multi-user integration (See also). Once you start going down the iPhone/iTouch route, you will discover a very interesting set of problems with sharing your music library.

PS. An exercise for the Reader: Consider an alternative path that Google's Android might take, and how that path resembles a future funding mechanism for the New York Times.

Monday, January 21, 2008

Gordon's 4 laws of acquisition

Contemplation of Apple's time capsule has reminded me of Gordon's 4 rules of acquisition.

Well, actually, none of them are mine really. I'll just lay claim to this particular arrangement. Credit goes to the forgotten sources that gave us the memes, and life that proved them true.
  1. Never acquire anything until you really, really, want it -- three separate times.
  2. The real cost is the lifetime cost, from acquisition to disposal. Or, as per a recent NYT post, think subscription -- not ownership. In the modern world we don't own, we subscribe to something that's neither inert nor living. The purchase price is often the least of things.
  3. Don't buy on promises or potential. Acquire for real value now. Anything in the future is a plus (or, sometimes, a minus).
  4. Don't buy more than you can consume now. We all have fixed resources to acquire and adopt new things; acquisitions that sit on the shelf depreciate very quickly.
The rules work for acquiring a scanner or a corporation, though corporations may have more leeway with #3. I suppose, with a minimal tweak or two, they work for marriage too.

Rule #3 didn't used to be true of computers. In the days when our computers were open platforms, we could reasonably expect that the market would meet our needs. That's obviously not true for Apple's increasingly closed products; whether it's an Airport Extreme*, Time Capsule*, an iPod, an Air Book or an iPhone. It's also true for Windows however -- there will never be a real alternative to Microsoft Office on Microsoft's platform.

* Alas, how much better these things would be if Firewire had not been eliminated by the far inferior USB 2.0 interface. Another story though.

PS. Ever notice that no-one does a list of "four" things? Three, yes. Ten, yes. Never four. Until now ...

Saturday, December 29, 2007

Music industry sows the wind

In the immortal words of Bugs Bunny: "You realize, of course, this means war" (emphases mine):
Download Uproar: Record Industry Goes After Personal Use - washingtonpost.com

...in an unusual case in which an Arizona recipient of an RIAA letter has fought back in court rather than write a check to avoid hefty legal fees, the industry is taking its argument against music sharing one step further: In legal documents in its federal case against Jeffrey Howell, a Scottsdale, Ariz., man who kept a collection of about 2,000 music recordings on his personal computer, the industry maintains that it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his computer.

The industry's lawyer in the case, Ira Schwartz, argues in a brief filed earlier this month that the MP3 files Howell made on his computer from legally bought CDs are "unauthorized copies" of copyrighted recordings....

...At the Thomas trial in Minnesota, Sony BMG's chief of litigation, Jennifer Pariser, testified that "when an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." Copying a song you bought is "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy,' " she said...
Meanwhile, in Canada, the music industry proposes to put a rather substantial tax on memory cards -- with an iPod tariff to come.

Fools.

Until now a substantial number of elder geeks (i.e. people with money) have been on the sidelines of the copyright wars. For us the iPod has meant a renewed interest in music, and a steady stream of CD purchases (since we distrust DRM intensely, we don't buy online). We've been on the establishment-friendly side of Pogue's demographic copyright gulf.

But now ... Now the music industry is trying to change the rules of the game.

That's not fair. The Geek Code of Honor requires us to respond by the ancient rule of sheeps and lambs. Some will say the Code obliges us to support the theft of music and video alike, for the criminals have now become the honest outlaw.

The RIAA really shouldn't have crossed this line.

1/2/08: Turns out WaPo got it wrong, but the blogosphere is correcting. It's easy to see why WaPo jumped the gun, the RIAA's legal argument may partly rely on the fact that it has not been shown in US courts that ripping a CD is "fair use". So the RIAA hasn't pulled the trigger yet, but they've pulled back the hammer...

Thursday, December 20, 2007

Daring Fireball demonstrates why journalists are going to get smarter

I don't remember a golden age of journalism, but rumor has it that once upon a time journalists did not merely parrot press releases and insider leaks.

Now journalists are suffering from the twin demons of a defunct business model and a super-powered reader feedback loop. I don't applaud the end of journalism's business model, but I heartily approved of the feedback loop.

A widely read blog like Daring Fireball is to the old-fashioned letters page as a flame thrower is to a match.  That's a massive change, and it has to affect how journalists do their business.

Today DF demonstrates the new world by rending a poorly written "Fast Company" cover article into nanosocopic bits of confetti...

Daring Fireball: Yet Another in the Ongoing Series Wherein I Examine a Piece of Supposedly Serious Apple Analysis From a Major Media Outlet ...

...Except for all the music from any store that sells DRM-free music, like Amazon’s or eMusic’s. Otherwise what’s being argued here is that Apple should support Microsoft’s DRM platform, formerly known as PlaysForSure, recently renamed to “Certified for Windows Vista”, which Microsoft itself doesn’t support in its own Zune players. There’s a lot of stupid packed into the above 13-word sentence...

DF is piling on, but this poor journalist wrote a cover story comprised of an extraordinary set of factually incorrect and incoherent assertions. This kind of thing does deserve the DF flamethrower.

I hope both Fast Company and the misguided author will learn something from the experience. Feedback need not be painless to be valuable.

(BTW, I think one could write an interesting story about Apple's ongoing quality issues and some of their errors-of-arrogance -- like the oddly incompatible iPhone headphone plug. Alas, that one's for another day...)

Thursday, October 18, 2007

In Our Time: Opium Wars and the 2008 Olympics, Spinoza's radical determinism and the new feed page

Melvyn Bragg's BBC show, In Our Time, has begun a new season. I'm a fan.

The bad news is that the BBC is sticking with its execrable latest-episode-only download policy. So if you want to listen to the superb Opium War episode on your MP3 player you need to either use Audio Hijack Pro to capture the RealAudio stream or (if you know me) ask me for a DVD with the entire series [1]. Incidentally, this is a good time to write a quick email to set IOT free.

The good news is there's a new page that makes it easy to subscribe to a feed. I used to subscribe via iTunes, but if I went a week without using iTunes I missed the show. Now I subscribe via iTunes and Bloglines; I use Bloglines at least daily so it's easy for me to save the MP3 and email it to myself.

On to Opium War. Alas, it's from last season, so you're stuck with theft or RealAudio hijacking [2]. Wonderful episode that cleverly features 2 UK professors with Chinese names [4]:

Yangwen Zheng, Lecturer in Modern Chinese History at the University of Manchester
Lars Laamann, Research Fellow in Chinese History at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London
Xun Zhou, Research Fellow in History at SOAS, University of London

That was a politically astute decision as well as didactically informed. These 3 are willing to say things that people with non-Chinese surnames are going to pussy-foot about. Even the one contributor who's voice trembles slightly when describing her parents outrage at the "unequal treaty" more or less concedes that her feelings reflect modern sentiments rather than the historic record.

In brief (sorry, you need to listen, these are my interpretations):

  • To understand this as a 19th century person might, think 1920s prohibition or 2010 cigarette management. Opium was an over the counter remedy into 20th century America; Opium was the now-lost secret to well-behaved children around the world. [3]
  • Tobacco smoking, introduced to China by the Portugese, was the technical innovation that built the opium trade. Smoking opium is much more entertaining than eating eat, so, as is forever true, tobacco was the gateway drug.
  • Lin Tse-Hsu, the Chinese intellectual, modernist, and bureaucrat who triggered the smoldering conflict, might have been pleased with the long term impact of the enforced opium trade. Lin Tse-Hu wanted China to modernize and be able to stand independently. These scholars agreed that China's defeat in the Opium Wars, and the resulting trade agreements including later trade in industrial goods, was a major contributor to the rise of modern China. So Lin Tse-Hsu lost his battle, but in losing he did achieve his true desire. I wonder if he ever realized that. History has strange lessons indeed.
  • For 19th century China the Opium War was something of a sideshow and trading Hong Kong was a trivial cost to placate the transiently powerful foreigners. The Dynasty had much bigger internal problems to worry about.
  • Opium was a currency in the China before the war, especially after the introduction of smoking (which must have increased the value of the currency ten fold), an alternative to copper. From an economic perspective the war resulted from a balance of trade problem. England was industrializing, and like all industrial nations they were switching from alcohol (locally grown) to caffeine (tea, imported from China -- coffee was not yet widely available). Alcohol was handy for dulling the pain of pre-industrial life, but industry required shorter sleep periods. England was hooked on uppers, but pre-industrial China was hooked on anesthesia. Prior to the Opium War England sent new world silver to China to buy tea, but Chinese trade restrictions meant England had nothing to sell in return. China was the "silver drain" of the world. The cost of tea was rising fast, and something had to be done.
  • Britain's attack was a mixture of governmental and private sector action. In those days the boundaries between industry and state were even thinner than in modern America -- and they're pretty darned thin here.
  • After the 1920s the Opium War, previously an annoyance primarily to Chinese intelligentsia, was transformed into a populist causes to further nationalist movements. So the Opium War not only transformed China economically, it did double duty in creating the modern Chinese nation. So it remains today, there is no doubt that many Chinese leaders, and most of the Chinese nation, bitterly resent what they know of the conflict. This is very human of course. Americans who say "Remember the Alamo" typically know very little about it, and no Chinese leader can possibly be as ignorant of history as George Bush Jr.

It's a great show and really, required listening for anyone living in the Decade of China to come. The 2008 Olympics are near, and, assuming the news is not entirely about athletic asphyxiation, you'll hear more about the two Opium Wars.

On the other hand, last season's Spinoza episode, while better than the immensely dull "William of Occam", was still disappointing. Spinoza was a radical determinist, but none of the speakers put this into a 17th century context of Calvin and Newton (billiard-ball determinism), or in the 20th century context of Einstein (non-quantum General Relativity implies rigid determinism), post-modern physics, transactional interpretations of quantum physics or even the Tralfamadorians. Melvyn was asleep at the switch on that one.

Oh, Occam? Don't bother. It reminded me too much of my work.

[1] Note to BBC. I'm just joking of course.

[2] Do any of the file sharing sites do IOT? If they do I might just try out an OS X client.

[3] One of the most memorable drug seeking patients I've encountered asked me, incidentally as our routine visit was ending, for an opium containing remedy that I think was a prescription med for children in the mid-20th century. I had no idea what it was, but of course I looked it up before prescribing. I recall she was very professional about it, she didn't get too upset when I pointed out that it wasn't really a good idea.

[4] I originally wrote "3" because I swear Laars sounded like he had a slight Chinese accent. I wonder which was his first language. The other profs pronounced his name something like "Lau".

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

From Napster to Amazon: A Yahoo! insider's DRM history and projections

This gentleman has been around -- from WinAmp's Napster-associated glory days to an exec position at Yahoo! Music. He says Yahoo! is done with DRM ... (for music, anyway!)

Convenience Wins, Hubris Loses and Content vs. Context, a Presentation for Some Music Industry Friends at FISTFULAYEN

... But now, eight years later, Amazon’s finally done what was clearly the right solution in 1999. Music in the format that people actually want it in, with a Web-based experience that’s simple and works with any device. I bought tracks from Amazon (Kevin Drew and No Age), downloaded them, sync’d them to my new iPod Nano, and had them playing in my home audio system (Control 4) in less than five minutes. PRAISE JESUS. It only took 8 years.

8 years. How much opportunity have we lost in those 8 years? How much naivety and hubris did we have when we said, “if we build it they will come”? What did we spend? And what did we gain? We certainly didn’t gain mass user adoption or trust, two prerequisites to success on the Internet.

Inconvenient experiences don’t have Web-scale potential, and platforms which monetize the gigantic scale of the Web is the only way to compete with the control you’ve lost, the only way to reclaim value in the music industry. If your consultants are telling you anything else, they are wrong...

It's a great history lesson as well as a sign of the times.

There may be grounds for optimism with music DRM, but I think the story will be a bit different for video. I'd still watch the next transition point, which will be when the CD dies. There'll be room to return to DRM then.

I don't count this as a sign of public awakening --  financial interest (easy stealing!) and wisdom (DRM really is bad) were too aligned in this case to support optimistic lessons.

BTW, it's kind of obvious I hope, but this is not a problem for Apple. He put his DRM-free Amazon tunes on his iPod.

Tuesday, September 25, 2007

Amazon MP3 Store: great news for Apple customers

Amazon's MP3 store is a smash hit among OS X gurus like Gruber:
Daring Fireball: The Amazon MP3 Store and Amazon MP3 Downloader

...The songs sound great and come with high-resolution album art. Singles cost $.89 or $.99, and album prices start as low as $4.99 — i.e. they’ve introduced variable pricing to sell music for less, not more, than the iTunes Store. When you search for songs from an artist whose entire catalog is not available through their MP3 store, Amazon provides a direct link to the artist’s catalog in their CD store. Two million total songs is far less than the six million Apple offers at the iTunes Store, but it’s a pretty good start, and all of Amazon MP3’s songs are DRM-free. I’m not sure how many DRM-free iTunes Plus tracks Apple offers, but it certainly seems like far fewer than one-in-three, and thus far fewer than two million. So while Amazon can’t claim to offer the most songs, they might be able to claim the most DRM-free songs. In just a few minutes of shopping, I found plenty of songs at Amazon that are only available from the iTunes Store with DRM. Given the Amazon MP3 Store’s audio quality, prices, and user experience, I can’t see why anyone would buy DRM-restricted music from iTunes that’s available from Amazon. And given that Amazon is quite a bit cheaper than iTunes Plus, you might as well check Amazon first. I plan to...
Hallelujah. Amazon's not messing about, they launched this for OS X and Windows simultaneously. At last, Apple has very serious competition.

Of course since Amazon's tunes work perfectly with iPods, it's not going to hurt Apple's revenue stream all that much. I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple's share price fall a bit then recover as investors realize Amazon's play is poison for Microsoft's strategy.

The joy of it is that it will make Apple work harder to keep its customers happy, and it will strengthen the anti-DRM solution.

Now, just wait until Gruber realizes that Amazon has embedded a unique identifier in each song that they can connect back to his credit card* ....

* How do I know this? I don't. I'd bet on it though. I'm sure Apple does the same sort of thing with their non-DRMd tunes, I even expect that an AAC you burn from a CD using iTunes contains some sort of embedded identifier.

Update 9/26/07: I'm 99% sure John Gruber doesn't read this obscure blog, but shortly after I worte of the "Amazon unique identifier" he told us that while Apple embeds an identifier (which happens to resemble an email address but is tied to credit card identification) in their DRM-free downloads Amazon, in the NYT, says they don't (!). Well, gee, I was wrong. That's never happened before :-). Gruber has an essay on the broader implications too.

Saturday, September 08, 2007

Shared music, shared ringtones, iPhone - uh-oh

Despite all chatter about iTunes and DRMd iPhone ringtones nobody seems to have caught on that Apple is going to make it very, very, hard to share a family music library. Apple is has the same goals as NBC -- eliminate sharing of music and videos among family members. They're just much smarter about it (so much for Jobs anti-DRM message!).

The problem is that an OS X music library belongs to a user account. So do the contacts, phone backup, DRMd ringtones, etc.

So what happens if two people in a family both have an iPhone? They need to sync within their user account. That means they can't share music, because only one account can own the music library.

There are workarounds, but they're awkward, unsupported, and Apple can break them at any time. I've posted a few times about this topic, this 2005 post is the most extensive.

Tuesday, September 04, 2007

NBC plugs the family loophole in Digital Rights Management

Daring Fireball points out where NBC is going with its DRM:
Daring Fireball

This just shows how moronic these NBC clowns are. You don’t have to be a nerd or obsessive to see how these restrictions suck — they’re obvious. No mixing means you and your spouse can’t both buy material for each other’s use.
All of our music is on one server, regardless of whether my wife bought it or a I bought it. Some predates our marriage, most does not. NBC doesn't like this. They want only one person to have rights to any media.

DF doesn't mention, however, that while iTunes does not forbid mixing, neither does Apple encourage it. Many iTunes related features don't work if two people sync to one repository. Most people don't notice this when they use an iPod, but wait until both use an iPhone. They'll discover that they need to be in their own user account when they sync, and that means they won't have easy access to a shared music library any more. Apple is not so much virtuous as subtle. NBC is merely stupid. From my post of November 2005 ...
... How best to understand this? Think of the secret and forbidden lust of the media companies -- the (patent pending 2040) BrainLock™ (Palladium Inside!™). The BrainLock prevents any access to DRMd material by control of visual, auditory, tactile, and olfactory inputs. BrainLock Enhanced™ (mandatory upgrade 2045) makes it impossible to consider any action that would circumvent the workings of the BrainLock (thereby ending the trickle of death sentences related to violations of the DMCA amendment of 2043).

Really, the idea of "shared property" is a legacy of ancient law related to the fading practice of marriage. The media companies abhore this idea. Each person should own their own BrainLocked media (ok, just biometric locked until the advantages of BrainLock associated enhancements become irresistible). If you and your multiple spouses and myriad children want to listen to music, you each need your own music stream. Joint access is discouraged, though it will not be effectively blocked for some time.

The bottom line is that Apple's media partners really don't want multiple users accessing a single iTunes repository. They can't do anything about multiple iPods for now (after all, a single user might have an iPod and a Nano!), but they accept that grudgingly. They won't allow anything to encourage multiple iPods with multiple users, and that means this "design problem" isn't going to get fixed -- because it's working as designed.

Monday, July 02, 2007

Gordon's Tech is not gone -- but feeds may require a manual update

The short version: I moved Gordon's Tech to a new address: tech.kateva.org. Subscriptions (like bloglines, google reader) were supposed to auto-update, but it's not working. If you read that blog, you'll need to update your feed. Sorry!

The longer version: Gordon's Tech is one of my 3 public blogs (Gordon's Notes is this one, Be the Best You Can Be focuses on cognitive disorders). GT consists almost entirely of technical notes and discoveries I'm interested in; instead of storing them in a desktop file I put 'em into a blog. Works for me, and the results are available for search. Most readers find those posts when solving a tech problem with Google. A small number of readers subscribe to the feed, though the blog doesn't make many concessions to a subscriber audience.

Yesterday I moved Gordon's Tech from a blogspot domain to a Google custom domain. In theory Google's Blogger uses a "301 redirect" to tell feed readers to update their feeds. In practice, that's not working. So subscribers need to update manually. The new URL is tech.kateva.org.

We now return you to your regular programming ...