> In article <pJednRbH7t_Y3RDVnZ2dnUVZ_sninZ2d@giganews.com>, Joe Kappus > <joecool1029@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> In case you didn't know, I was referring to the only way to update >> >> the ipod without iTunes. Apple distributes the firmware as a zipped >> >> package with the filename suffix .ispw. Now to get this onto the >> >> ipod and trigger the firmware flash, you need a program that >> >> operates low-level (ie. dd) and copies the data bitwise to the >> >> firmware partition of the ipod. This REQUIRES one to be proficient >> >> in the command line as dd can wipe over any partition including the >> >> music partition or even the computer's harddisk drive. Now do you >> >> understand or do I need to break it down step by step? >> > >> > that's absolute rubbish. there is *no* need to use the command line >> > to update firmware. it can all be done within itunes. >> >> To keep the mood, CAN'T YOU READ? The argument was iTunes is the only >> way to update firmware, but what if you don't want to use iTunes or you >> can't use iTunes? Hmm, what then? You need to follow the above. > > what's wrong with using itunes to update the firmware? even if you hate > the program, all that needs to be done is launch it, click a button and > wait a few minutes. why make the process more difficult than it needs > to be? > > of course, if you want to update the firmware in a totally unsupported > manner then the procedure won't be all that simple. nothing unusual > about that. >
In my case that was the only procedule available, most manufacturers make firmware updating operating system independant. Not to say it's a major issue, however the old updater could be run under emulation, iTunes cannot. I've never seen a company bundle it in with a completley unrelated application.
>> >> Consider this. Apple chose to use the Apple Lossless format on the >> >> ipod. This decision was made even knowing that FLAC was more widely >> >> used and technologically superior in every way. Apple wouldn't have >> >> even had to pay for it, so why did they use an inferior format? >> > >> > two lossless formats, yet one is inferior? how does that work? >> >> Ability to provide an identical copy after compression and >> decompression. FLAC's md5sum matches every time. Efficiency of >> compression, FLAC saves more space. Finally, software support. iTunes >> and the ipod are really the only major platforms supporting the format. > > once again, if both are lossless, how is it one is superiour to the > other?? >
I just gave you the reasons why, I want to know that when my ipod becomes obsolete that I don't have to re-encode all my music over to a non-shitty format that actually has both hardware and software support.
> and with the ipod commanding 70-80% of the mp3 player market (i haven't > checked the latest numbers but it's around that), then apple lossless > *is* the dominant lossless format. >
It is most certainly not the most dominant lossless format. As you said before, most people do not want to keep (nor can they keep) an entire library of music in a lossless format on the ipod. If you actually pull your head out of the Apple box, no other music site, and no sane consumer would buy or use ALAC. Cars are being made now with HD-based storage systems that support FLAC, many other portable players support FLAC. In fact, the usual question I hear is "What the hell is this and how do I convert it to something I can use?".
No, it is not the most dominant format, nor will it ever be. FLAC carries a whole world of format support, if you want to be chained to Apple for the rest of your life, stick to that format because Apple is the only company that is ever going to use it.
>> There's other issues too such as not being able to fit ALAC into any >> container and speed of encoding and decoding. If they used FLAC you >> would be saving more power as CPU usage is lower and higher efficiency >> of compression allows the drive to spin up less. > > since the ipod pre-fetches audio, spin up time is a non-issue. > furthermore, most ipods no longer have hard drives, so there is no > spin-up time at all. as for cpu load, i doubt there's a significant > difference, if there's one at all. >
I wasn't complaining about spin up time, I was complaining about spinning it up more often, which does kill the battery. As for cpu load, that's up for debate, I'll give you that.
>> >> To restrict the >> >> consumer more. I can't think of a single product not made by Apple >> >> that supports APL, and most other music services provide FLAC as >> >> their lossless choice. This restricts the consumer to the iTunes >> >> store for high quality music and (ironically) fills their device up >> >> quicker as the format is less efficient. >> > >> > most people can't hear a difference and they aren't about to load up >> > an ipod with lossless anyway, since the ipods are used in situations >> > where even if there was an audible difference, it would not be >> > noticed (e.g., listening on a bus or jogging). >> >> Not everyone uses the ipod with iBuds, it has been considered an >> audiophile device numerous times and various modifications and >> headphone amps, etc.. all allow it to bring out lossless music. Where >> better? iPods provide a great amount of space at a small physical size. > > it doesn't matter what earbuds they use. most people can't hear a > difference, even in ideal conditions. and ipods are generally used in > non-ideal conditions (bus, plane, etc.) so even if there was an audible > difference, it would not matter.
You obviously live in a city. Headphones with a good seal block out most of the ambient noise, maybe I can't tell the difference between mp3 V0 and FLAC on a bus, but I'm sure using a headphone amp in a quiet room I could.
> > now if you want to use apple lossless (or flac) on a home music system > played through exotic audiophile speakers, then maybe it will matter. >
Lossless provides a second pro, it allows music to be reconverted again and again with no loss over generations, most people CAN hear the difference between something that was WMA and converted to AAC or MP3, two generations of lossless take such a great effect that it doesn't take an audiophile to hear the difference.
>> >> AT&T was chosen by Apple because of >> >> their notorious treatment of their customers. They are a company >> >> which has always refused to provide unlock codes, yet lets the NSA >> >> have a backdoor into every phone conversation. It was a perfect >> >> match. >> > >> > apple chose at&t because they abuse and violate the rights of their >> > customers? now that's a new one. also, at&t will *gladly* provide >> > unlock codes after a certain period of time. >> >> WRONG, I suggest you goto howardforums. AT&T, and its former companies >> Cingular and AT&T Wireless NEVER provided unlock codes ever. Other >> phone companies will (ie. t-mobile after being a customer for 90 days), >> but AT&T has never. > > actually, howardforums is where i read that they'll unlock after 90 > days. >
I'll give it a shot and see where it goes, I tried it before about a year and a half ago and the answer was a flat-out "no, we do not provide unlock keys".
>> >> Buttons are nice, they provide tactile feedback, something that most >> >> touchpad technology can't do. Apple had a sick obsession with >> >> touchbuttons, and the 3G iPod was almost universally rejected >> >> because of the lack of feedback, no other model carried touch >> >> buttons after the user backlash. >> > >> > the problem with the 3g ipod was that the buttons were often erratic, >> > not that they were touch buttons. >> > >> It had everything to do with them being touch buttons, they were >> erratic because they provided no tactile feedback. > > no, they were erratic because of a poor design and registered multiple > touches when only one touch ocurred. >
Touchpads do that, it's an inherant drawback of the technology. Sure it was bad design but it had nothing to do with build quality. That kind of touchpad needs an automatic lock and/or some mechanism of haptic feedback to negate some of the drawbacks.
>> >> I do have a macbook pro in the house, I *HATE* it. Eyecandy may >> >> sell these computers but it sure doesn't make them usable. >> >> Everytime I use the thing it feels like I'm developing carpal tunnel >> >> from the cramped keyboard. All that space to work with and they use >> >> maybe 1/3rd of it for a keyboard. >> > >> > it's a standard sized keyboard. what are you talking about?? >> >> Just because it has all the keys doesn't make it a standard sized >> keyboard. The keys are cramped and poorly placed and a huge amount of >> space is left unused. > > nonsense. the keys are not cramped at all and the backlight makes > typing on it a joy. >
Have you ever used a "real" full-sized keyboard, those keys are cramped. There's a difference between consolidation and cramping it. As for the backlight, does it warm your fingers or provide a soothing massage? If not, it's irrelevant to this part of the conversation.
>> The touchpad, while one of the nicer on the market is absurdly large >> and takes up space the keyboard should occupy. The top row of keys are >> cut off, as are the directional keys and the ctrl and function keys. >> It's not a comfortable keyboard and obviously wasn't designed for hours >> of use. > > you're among the few that dislike it. most people find it quite > comfortable.
I suppose if you're a plumber you get used to working with shit. Dell has had some bad keyboards in terms of build quality, but none are worse in layout. HP on the other hand goes a bit overboard with the "full- size" idea even adding the number pad.
Apple though.. keyboard design has gone downhill. I'm gonna limit my attack to the macbook pro, the other models are not so bad.
> >> That and the build quality feels plasticky, cheap compared to most >> other laptops and even the older macbooks. The only thing that's nice >> about it is the backlight but that's not really a necessity. > > the backlight is wonderful, and in my opinion, a necessity in any > keyboard. unfortunately, backlit desktop keyboards are hard to find and > not all that cheap.
Other manufacturers use an even more practical method and provide a LED on top of the lid that illuminates the keyboard and nearby space. This is a much more cost effective solution. Oh, a keyboard backlight may look pretty, but it's no necessity. I'd spend more money for a better feeling plastic then cool glow-in-the-dark keys, seems kinda gimmicky to me.
> >> >> I've used the service, and was extremely dissatisfied. Went to the >> >> mall early in the morning with a clicker (ipod with a dead drive) >> >> some months back. At the time I was unaware of the system and >> >> having bought Applecare for my iPod expected to recieve decent >> >> service. >> > >> > by your own admission, you didn't know how it worked, yet you blame >> > apple? >> > >> > >> I blame Apple for not accommodating customers who don't feel like >> wasting time and fuel because they want to minimize operating expense. >> If the stores are doing so well then why aren't they hiring more staff >> and expanding the space to occupy the amount of people that come in. > > i'm sure apple has a very good idea (much better than either you or i) > of how much space to devote to selling products and how much space for > the genius bar, as well as the staffing requirements for the store. >
Right.. you said it before, anyone can buy an ipod from online or other stores. I'm sure they could make some room for support.
>> When you begin to think about it, maybe that's some of the marketing >> ploy. Keep less stores and put them in highly populated areas so they >> are always full. > > you'd rather they put a lot of stores in rural areas and not as many in > populated areas? that makes no sense. >
No, build more stores where there are people. Then they wouldn't require appointments, would they?
>> Makes you think everyone's buying Apple when they actually aren't, over >> half the people in the Apple store are either screwing with the >> merchandise or requesting service. > > and you base this on what? do you have sales records and patron counts > of the stores? >
Do you have sales records and patron counts to prove me wrong?
>> >> I knew the store wasn't open for another 10 minutes or so but I saw >> >> a steady stream of customers going in and out. Went in and was >> >> asked if I had an appointment. "Excuse me?" "You need to have an >> >> appointment, come back when we open". Ok, granted they weren't >> >> open, I waited the 10 minutes. >> > >> > so at this point you knew an appointment was required yet you still >> > didn't make one? >> > >> > >> They didn't offer me one, and they kicked me out of the store. > > i find it hard to believe that they didn't help you make an appointment > from one of the in-store macs. on the other hand, i'm not particularly > surprised they kicked you out. >
Course you wouldn't be, Apple users must be used to asshole treatment. I on the other hand, am not.
>> >> Came back when the store was officially open and asked them about >> >> warranty service. AGAIN I was asked if I had an appointment. I >> >> told them that I was instructed to come back when they opened. At >> >> this point I'm starting to get pissed at how they treat their >> >> customers. I made an appointment. The time was over two hours >> >> later because the tech didn't come in till noon. >> > >> > they're there when the store opens. i've dropped off computers at >> > 10a and picked them up at noon on the same day, fully repaired. >> > >> > >> Well I guess that's not always the case, else I would not have had to >> wait. > > it would depend what's wrong with the product. one time i brought in a > mac in and it had to be sent out to the repair depot in houston. it was > back two days later, also by noon. >
If there's one thing I will not disagree on, depot service is fast and efficient. They do unfortunatley use DHL, but so long as your package isn't lost it gets done rather quickly. I'm talking about on-site service.
>> >> Finally, I was able to come back and the whole process took less >> >> then 5 minutes. No appointment should have been required as it was >> >> obviously broken and all it required was a button pusher to ok the >> >> exchange. >> > >> > are you are the only person who needed service? everyone else should >> > just let you go first? >> >> Read earlier comment, Apple is the only store I've ever been to where >> they send you away if you don't register and pick a timeslot on their >> website. > > really? ever visited an auto dealer? they won't even look at you > without an appointment. >
To buy a car? I've never been requested to make an appointment, if I was then I obviously would go elsewhere to buy my product.
As for service, a car is not a computer and requires a greater amount of time to look at. (also a greater amount of parts, labor, etc.) An electronics store cannot compare.
> i'd *much* rather show up at a predetermined time and wait maybe 5-10 > minutes instead of waiting an indeterminate amount of time, which could > be hours on a busy day. >
Again, build more stores?
>> >> 1. The stores are usually fairly small, they are the size of Best >> >> Buy's music section. >> > >> > some stores are small and others are huge, notably new york city, >> > boston and san francisco. >> >> Some are huge, a very few in the largest cities. All best buys are >> very large, even when they aren't in a big city. > > different type of store. >
Flawed statistic.
>> I dug around for some numbers, seems Apple has 219 stores worldwide, >> while best buy has over 1,150 with plans to open hundreds more. >> Tiffany has a small footprint just like Apple, they have 167 stores in >> the world. > > and mcdonalds has even more worldwide. what's your point? >
My point is, of course Apple is going to be able to post higher sales per sq foot because they don't have much area to begin with. It was a stupid statistic that showed nothing.
>> >> 2. Their goods are notoriously overpriced. At least when they used >> >> PowerPC hardware you got what you paid for. Intel gave the company >> >> a super deal and they moved to standard x86 hardware, of course >> >> profits would skyrocket without a price cut. Gold and skilled >> >> designers cost Tiffany & Co. more then cheap chinese child labor >> >> does for Apple. (oh no, ABC and Apple gave china the gold seal of >> >> approval for working conditions, but any other news source will tell >> >> you otherwise). >> > >> > actually the prices are comparable for the same configuration. >> >> I doubt it, do you honestly think Apple would have ported all its code >> from PPC to x86 if it cost the same? It doesn't make sense, PPC is the >> better architecture. > > in some ways (not all), powerpc is better, but unfortunately, ibm and > motorola/freescale did not advance the chip anywhere near to what intel > was doing. plus, there are other benefits to x86 such as running > windows at native speeds alongside os x. >
Are you kidding me? It had nothing to do with IBM and Motorola not advancing their chips. It had everything to do with the Apple developers not utilizing those chips and the widespread use of x86-coded programs.
> also, the roots of os x had been running on x86 long before there was a > powerpc port (early 1990s when nextstep was ported to x86). apple > maintained osx on multiple platforms until it was practical to make the > change. >
The roots of Windows had been ported to PPC during the same time period, and many speculate Microsoft still has versions of it running on PPC. In fact, the Xbox360 is a PPC-powered device that uses much of the Windows functionality.
>> >> 3. There aren't enough stores to service all the customers, they >> >> have what, less than 200 stores in the entire US? I may be wrong, >> >> but I seem to remember the worldwide count of stores is under 300. >> >> Of course it's efficient, they waste no money on building stores >> >> and/or service centers. >> > >> > apple has a lot of stores in major cities and not as many in smaller >> > cities. nothing unusual about that. macs and ipods are also sold at >> > other stores and of course, on line. >> >> Yes, but official services are provided only one of two ways. One is >> by going to an Apple store, and the other is by mailing it out. Really >> that's not so bad but Apple should have seperated the stores and the >> service centers. > > why? other stores don't separate them. >
Other stores don't have them, they leave that to service centers or depots.
>> >> I wouldn't want the Apple video editing junk, as for Photoshop, I >> >> run it just fine either virtualized in windows or through wine. >> >> That's not really even necessary as well because I can do most of >> >> what Photoshop does in The Gimp. >> > >> > apple's 'video editing junk' is considered to be among the best in >> > the industry and the gimp isn't even remotely close to photoshop. >> > anyone who thinks that is totally unaware of what photoshop can >> > actually do. >> >> Did I not mention that I use photoshop? I merely stated that for many >> things The Gimp is perfectly suitable (and economical). > > it may be suitable for simple tweaks, but you said that you can do 'most > of what photoshop does in the gimp' and that is absolutely false. the > differences between the two are staggering. for instance, the gimp > lacks adjustment layers, high bit, smart objects and camera raw > (dcraw/ufraw are very primitive), just to name a few. >
For many trivial things it is perfectly suitable and I'll stand by it for trivial work. If I was doing more advanced work of course I'd stick to photoshop. The two are very different, and by no means am I calling them equal.
>> I edit audio and >> I do that just fine on Linux, I used to do it just fine on Windows (but >> the realtime scheduling in Linux is so much better for it). I don't >> edit video, but I'm sure if I did, there wouldn't be an issue. > > you don't edit video, but yet you know that apple's video editing > software is junk?
I wouldn't waste my time with it, let's put it that way. If required I'd find a better solution.
