My husband’s iPod died. I gave it to him for Christmas several years ago, when dropping $400 on an item wasn’t an impossibility. At this point spending $200 to replace it is a bit out of reach.
I see tons of MP3 players out there for $50 or so, but he insists that he won’t be able to play the 250 songs he purchased on Itunes on anything but an iPod.
Really? Seriously? Isn’t that a monopoly or piracy or anti-trusty or something?
Seems like a rip-off to me.
First of all, you say the iPod “died.” What does that mean? If it’s a battery, it can be replaced inexpensively.
As far as purchased music goes, you can thank the RIAA for that. Apple protects purchased music from copying by restricting it to 5 devices. At this time (and for the foreseeable future) iPods and iPhones are the only portable devices which play DRM-protected music purchased from the iTunes store. It is possible to remove the DRM from the music by burning to CD and then re-importing, but it’s going to be tedious. There are are also “hacker” tools to strip DRM.
I’m not sure how easy it is to use, but I’ve heard good things about Doubletwist, which will strip DRM and also make it easier to sync your library with non-iPod devices.
If you’re a Mac user, DRM Dumpster will do about the same thing. So, for that matter, will spending a some quality time with a spindle of blank CDs.
The legal system is basically the RIAA’s bitch, so it’s regrettably legal to put those limits on the files. It is also, however, perfectly legal for you to strip the DRM from your files as long as you’re not turning a profit from it.
Let me also mention Requiem, available on all the better Bittorrent trackers.
Thank you so much!
There’s now iTunes Plus, which costs 30 cents more per track but uses no DRM.
iFixit sells spareparts (including things like displays) and has how-to instructions on how to repair your iPod.
You can also pick up an iPod Shuffle new for about $50, if you don’t want to have to deal with stripping the DRM off (which is a violation of the DMCA).
Yeah, I don’t know what’s wrong with his iPod, he’s had it for like 5 years and it’s more than a battery problem IIRC.
Hubby HATES technology; I’m better off getting him something inexpensive and replaceable. (:D)
It might be worth taking in to your local Apple store (if there is one nearby), because some iPod problems can be resolved by a simple reset.
Oh, let’s not restrict blame to the RIAA. Apple loves this little “feature” because it keeps their users beholden to them. When people look to upgrade MP3 players they are pretty much required to by the Apple du jour, at $200-$400 a pop. The fact that non-DRM MP3 are available on iTunes and other services emphasizes the fact that Apple is the larger villain here.
The labels, however, are the ones restricting which songs Apple can sell without DRM. One fo the reasons why they’re letting Amazon and others sell non-DRM’d music is that they’re trying to break the stranglehold Apple has on music sales (they’re the largest on-line seller, and the second largest seller of music, overall).
Doubtful. Apple gives explicit instructions on how to burn iTunes purchases to CD, then rip in the CD as MP3 files to make them playable on anything.
I’ve been anti I-Pod as long as anyone, but I now find myself with a new car with an I-Pod ready hook up and I’d kill to own a 160gb Nano, but I just can’t justify spending that kind of cash on nothing more than a 160gb flash drive with an interface. I really wish that Sandisk or someone else would enter the 100+gb market so that I don’t have to finally go Apple.
No, but I meant classic and not nano. I want the big one.
The Classic doesn’t use flash memory.
I realize you may be anti-Microsoft as well, but the Zune 120 is better than the iPod Classic in most respects.
Except it’s unlikely to work in his new car.:smack:
No.
Check any number of prior threads on this topic. The OP is in the US, judging from the location tag. In the US, not only is copyright infringement considered infringement regardless of profit or lack of same (and making personal copies for yourself is not “fair use” as defined by the law, no matter how many people claim it is), but the DMCA specifically forbids stripping DRM from material without the explicit permission of the copyright holder.
If we’re talking solely about music (audio, and not video, say), there are a few exceptions outlined in the Home recording act: Audio Home Recording Act - Wikipedia
but these apply only to analog recordings and a few specialized digital copying devices (not personal computers), and some of the provisions have been overturned by the DMCA in any case.
Whether it’s fair, right, or ethical aside, it’s not legal.
I don’t understand. If you purchase a track from iTunes, you can only play it so many times? Why would anybody want to do that?
I’ve used Napster from the beginning of my download-mania, pay a monthly fee for unlimited downloading/playing of anything, including downloading to a portable device. Now I don’t own this stuff without paying an additional fee per track or album, but the stuff I buy is equally unlimited and mine forever.
iTunes doesn’t work like that? I don’t get the attraction, then. Is it just the devices with lots of memory - does that mean these iPods are loaded up with music that can only be played a few times? WTF?
Someone explain this!