Mix: DRM roadblock, Patents, Google iTunes, Gap commercial

News

Mix: DRM roadblock, Patents, Google iTunes, Gap commercial

Reuters reports on digital music’s stumbling block of incompatibility: “At the heart of the problem are dueling digital-rights-management (DRM) systems from bitter rivals Apple and Microsoft.”

Lisa DiCarlo of Forbes says that Apple and Microsoft patents relating to a digital music player ”might not even be directly related.”

TheStreet.com reports: “According to market chatter, Apple is set to announce a deal with Google calling for Google to offer Apple’s iTunes music store through its own site.”

The MacTV Videocast website has posted a downloadable copy of the new Gap iTunes commercial in QuickTime format.

Submit A News Tip

Email A Friend

Next: New Podcast: The iLounge Week in Review 5

Previous: Forums: EQ settings, Display hack, Older iPodders, Intro thread

Shop in the loungeStore for iPod + iPhone Accessories.

Comments

1

Interesting article about the MSFT patent application...guess I should’ve tried to understand Platt’s submittal prior to sounding off about it.

The technology there in MSFT’s application is FAR MORE advanced than a simple stupid hierarchial menu syste (though it seems to include it in the application). It’s MORE about the music player (or computer or whatever) actually LEARNING about the user’s musical preferences to AUTOMATICALLY generate playlists on behalf of the listener.

Excuse me, Apple, but there isn’t an iPod out there right now that can do that.

Posted by flatline response on August 13, 2005 at 1:53 PM (PDT)

2

Ron-

I think you probably lack experience in reading patents and how they are structured.

I too, believe it was a bit broad, but it was more in depth and detailed than the Apple application.

I see no reason why someone with an iPod would rip WMA instead of AAC, but in terms of sound I think they’re equal.

Posted by Talking Madness in Los Angeles on August 15, 2005 at 12:04 AM (PDT)

3

To be honest, AAC and WMA are lame if you’re going to compare it to --aps. True, 128 WMA sounds worse than 128 AAC. But I can’t take you seriously if you say “indistinguishable from the original recording”. aps will give you almost near perfect results at roughly the same size as a 192C kbps mp3…

Both suck to be honest, I’ll only rip into mp3 as it means you can get any player you want in the future. I love my iPod, but, if something better comes out, I’m not going to stick with it. Same goes for WMA, neither is universal…

I did try AAC, but there wasn’t much support for it at the time, Tag & Rename didn’t support it when I tested it out, which is what every mp3 of mine goes through before it makes it into iTunes.

Posted by silver_haze20 on August 15, 2005 at 6:30 AM (PDT)

4

Luckily for all inventors (many of whom couldn’t write well if their life depended on it) a patent doesn’t need to read like “The Da Vinci Code”.

Posted by Talking Madness in Los Angeles on August 15, 2005 at 10:27 AM (PDT)

If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods or accessories, or if you sell or market iPod products or services, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators.