New Phone

[Kid Dynamite 7166]

The last couple of phones I've got through giffgaff on an 18month sim only deal. If you keep it in good nick you sell it at the end for £200+ and that knocks the monthly payment right down on the next one

[ewerk 31193]

While that is a bonus for apple, I think the biggest factor is being able to ensure that music is bought from itunes...

 

"Restricting audio output to a purely digital connection means that music publishers and streaming companies can start to insist on digital copyright enforcement mechanisms."

 

http://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2016/6/21/11991302/iphone-no-headphone-jack-user-hostile-stupid

Surely they can enforce DRM now if they want to via iOS? Edited August 29, 2016 by ewerk

[Andrew 4855]

Surely they can enforce DRM now if they want to via iOS?

Aye they can, it's a none argument.

 

That article is smug as fuck as well "oh look I won the argument in one point"

[NJS 4410]

Surely they can enforce DRM now if they want to via iOS?

Are you saying they only allow apps or will only allow apps which play music through iTunes?

 

Fuck me, they're even bigger cunts than I thought.

 

I honesly don't know how people put up with them.

[Andrew 4855]

Are you saying they only allow apps or will only allow apps which play music through iTunes?

 

Fuck me, they're even bigger cunts than I thought.

 

I honesly don't know how people put up with them.

No, he's saying they COULD if they wanted to. They don't currently and a digital out for music won't change that.

[Happy Face 29]

Surely they can enforce DRM now if they want to via iOS?

They do embed DRM in the tracks themselves don't they? Or did. These become unplayable on most devices. IOS can't control that on an android phone if the code is in ios, so it's not been the place to do it. You have to buy the more expensive version of songs to go DRM free.

 

"FairPlay prevents iTunes customers from using the purchased music directly on any portable digital music player other than the Apple iPod, Motorola ROKR E1, Motorola SLVR, Motorola RAZR V3i, the iPhone and the iPad."

 

They stop consumers listening to what they paid for on other devices, locking them in to their hardware. Now the aim is to stop people moving any OTHER music onto their device that hasn't got a digital receipt. I don't think IOS would lock that down either because there are independent music apps and songs that won't include Apple code.

 

http://www.stereogum.com/1893065/no-control-thoughts-on-the-end-of-the-headphone-jack-and-the-future-of-digital-music/franchises/but-whos-buying/

 

http://www.theverge.com/2015/6/5/8737537/apple-music-and-the-terrible-return-of-drm

[ewerk 31193]

Yes but my point is that they could remove those apps from the Apple Store and force all users to buy their music from iTunes but they haven't. They don't need to remove the audio jack to change that and if they did attempt it then you'd see droves of users switching to android. Apple know this which is why they haven't done it so far.

[Happy Face 29]

Apple has built itself up from nothing on the back of stolen music.  It loves it.  The ipod and itunes would have died a death without people stealing/ripping millions of tracks and it couldn't start shutting down the rights of people to move their music onto their device without alienating the consumer base.

 

It's a different world now though.  People don't have "their" music.  They rent music from a handful of streaming companies.  Apple will allow any of those to be used so their devices will remain popular.  Apple Music is in the game now though and wasn't before.

 

They will make a cost analysis decision of what will be lost from the dinosaurs like me who insist on owning their music that don't want to be tied down (mostly not their customers anyway by now, surely) and what will be gained from forcing customers to choose between Spotify, Google, Tidal & Apple Music... but pre-installing Apple Music on all devices.

 

It remains to be seen.  Maybe it is all about making the device 1mm thinner and improving waterproofing.  That's certainly something they can sell it as, rather than just locking their ecosystem down pointedly. I can well believe it's at least equally a feature to be the final nail in music ownership and piracy though.

[ewerk 31193]

Okay, I understand your first three paragraphs but can you explain to me how removing the headphone jack helps enforce DRM?

[Happy Face 29]

Okay, I understand your first three paragraphs but can you explain to me how removing the headphone jack helps enforce DRM?

 

Not really, but I can copy and paste someone else....

 

Once all the audio coming out of an Iphone is digital -- once there's no analog output -- Apple gets a lot more options about how it can relate to its competitors, and they're all good for Apple and bad for Apple's customers. Just by wrapping that audio in DRM, Apple gets a veto over which of your devices can connect to your phone. They can arbitrarily withhold permission to headphone manufacturers, insist that mixers be designed with no analog outputs, or even demand that any company that makes an Apple-compatible device must not make that device compatible with Apple's competitors, so home theater components that receive Apple signals could be pressured to lock out Samsung's signals, or Amazon's.

 

 

http://boingboing.net/2016/08/12/how-a-digital-only-smartphone.html

 

Doctorow says record-industry consortia could gather to make "standards" for DRM-locked audio, as the movie and TV companies have done (with Apple's cooperation) at the W3C. Such standards would let big tech companies (like Apple) interoperate with the music catalogs of the big record industry players.

 

But it might prevent smaller upstart tech companies from doing so. "It would prevent upstarts making new, revolutionary technology from entering the market, because all the audio would be locked with DRM," Doctorow says, "so entering the fold would mean toeing the line, or risking DMCA prosecution."

 

He adds: "I believe that Apple will not be the last company to come up with cool ways to experience, organize, and acquire music. It's natural that Apple would go along with initiatives that would stop the next Apple from launching the next iTunes, because every pirate wants to be an admiral."

 

 

 

http://www.fastcompany.com/3062741/the-iphones-disappearing-headphone-jack-reason-for-concern

[ewerk 31193]

Okay, that makes no sense to me. I understand how digital only output can restrict which devices can connect but I still don't see how that affects DRM, particularly when a digital to analogue audio adapter is almost certain to be available. ios has been facing increasing pressure from Android for years now, I don't see why they would attempt to further alienate existing Android users.

 

The second part seems to be about standardising DRM as they have done with video. Yet I can still easily watch my illegally downloaded TV shows and movies on my Apple device.

 

I think there's an awful lot of panty wetting going on over this. The audio jack is most likely being removed because it frees up space and it isn't a major inconvenience to double up on the lightning port.

[Rayvin 5292]

I recall with iPlayer back in the day that if I bought a movie through it, it wouldn't allow my laptop to hmdi connect to my tv and play the film. It prevented it fullscteening up to the tv.

 

It didn't do this for any good reason, so I assume it must be something like what HF sets out here. I googled solutions but simply found that many people had the same problem.

 

I don't know if it's related but I've never used iPlayer since and religiously avoid Apple products. If they aren't going to play nice with other products they can fuck off.

[Gemmill 45988]

Aye they're not exactly open source tbf. I think HF's and others suspicions about their plans will likely be borne out.

[ewerk 31193]

I recall with iPlayer back in the day that if I bought a movie through it, it wouldn't allow my laptop to hmdi connect to my tv and play the film. It prevented it fullscteening up to the tv.

 

It didn't do this for any good reason, so I assume it must be something like what HF sets out here. I googled solutions but simply found that many people had the same problem.

 

I don't know if it's related but I've never used iPlayer since and religiously avoid Apple products. If they aren't going to play nice with other products they can fuck off.

 

Yeah just as you can't play Apple bought audio/video through just any player. Doesn't mean that there aren't easy ways around it. There are easier ways for Apple to enforce DRM than digital audio outputs.

[Gemmill 45988]

Apple owes 13bn euros in back taxes to Ireland. Oof.

[ChezGiven 0]

= the size of the music industry

[Happy Face 29]

Apple owes 13bn euros in back taxes to Ireland. Oof.

 

And Ireland are appealing against the decision!  Not Apple.  

[Happy Face 29]

Reminded me of the story I read on the intercept about how Cook is holding th US to ransom...

 

WOULDN’T IT BE great if you could refuse to pay your taxes until you decided your tax rate was “fair”?

 

That is, of course, not the way it works. Unless you’re Apple.

 

Apple is currently holding $181 billion overseas, largely thanks to arbitrarily deciding that its most valuable intellectual property seems to live exclusively in low tax countries. For instance, at one time Apple’s subsidiaries in Ireland — a country with 4.6 million people — “earned” over one-third of all Apple’s worldwide revenue.

 

And due to a very business-friendly quirk in U.S. tax law, Apple doesn’t have to pay any U.S. taxes on its overseas profits until it “brings them back” to America.

 

Here’s what Apple CEO Tim Cook had to say about it in a long interview published this weekend in the Washington Post:

 

We’ve said at 40 percent, we’re not going to bring it back until there’s a fair rate. There’s no debate about it. Is that legal to do or not legal to do? It is legal to do. It is the current tax law. It’s not a matter of being patriotic or not patriotic. It doesn’t go that the more you pay, the more patriotic you are.

 

Cook simultaneously wants us to know he is not a bad “traditional CEO” who just cares about money. No, to the contrary, he feels an “incredible responsibility” to “the communities and the countries that the company operates in” and “the whole ecosystem of the company.”

 

Therefore, because Cook cares so little about money and so much about communities, Apple won’t be paying its taxes. That’s just fair.

 

And more fairness is just around the corner, Cook thinks. “I’m optimistic that, in 2017, there will be some sort of corporate tax reform,” he said. “The U.S. needs to invest more in infrastructure — so what would be great is if they take the tax proceeds of a corporate tax reform and invest it in infrastructure and roads and bridges and airports.”

 

Translated into plainer English, this means Cook believes that Corporate America’s longterm plan to hold the U.S. for ransom will in fact come to fruition next year.

 

U.S. corporations have by now stashed over $2.1 trillion in profits overseas (including Apple’s $181 billion), thereby starving the U.S. of revenue we could use to repair our collapsing infrastructure. What they want is for Americans to get so desperate that Congress is willing to deeply slash the corporate tax rate for “repatriated” money.

 

This will deliver a one-time jolt of tax revenue, at the cost of sending the message that everyone who possibly can should use tax avoidance schemes like Apple’s in the future.

 

Cook is right to be optimistic: Hillary Clinton has hinted that she’ll push for exactly this in her first 100 days in office, while Donald Trump has said explicitly that he wants to make it happen. Moreover, in the interview Cook also notes he’s gotten advice on how to handle this issue from both Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein and Bill Clinton.

 

So get ready for a tsunami of fairness, headed your way next year.

 

(“It doesn’t go that the more you pay, the more patriotic you are” has a nice ring to it. You should definitely tell that to the IRS.)

 

 

https://theintercept.com/2016/08/16/ceo-tim-cook-decides-apple-doesnt-have-to-pay-corporate-tax-rate-because-its-unfair/

 

Hopefully a decision like this can embolden the US not to capitulate.  I won't hold my breath like.

[ewerk 31193]

Did the US warn the EU against such a decision?

[Happy Face 29]

Did the US warn the EU against such a decision?

 

no idea.  According to Cook they plan to pay US tax when the rate is one they're willing to pay.  But can't see them paying tax on the same profits to two countries.  Expect the US will be somewhat miffed at Ireland getting the money that was supposed to go on their potholes.  That'll be why Ireland are appealing.  The drones will be on the way over

 

What do you say in response to Nobel economist Joseph Stiglitz’s comments on Bloomberg [television], where he called Apple’s profit reporting in Ireland a “fraud”?

 

I didn’t hear it. But if anybody said that, they don’t know what they’re talking about. Let me explain what goes on with our international taxes. The money that’s in Ireland that he’s probably referring to is money that is subject to U.S. taxes. The tax law right now says we can keep that in Ireland or we can bring it back. And when we bring it back, we will pay 35 percent federal tax and then a weighted average across the states that we’re in, which is about 5 percent, so think of it as 40 percent. We’ve said at 40 percent, we’re not going to bring it back until there’s a fair rate. There’s no debate about it. Is that legal to do or not legal to do? It is legal to do. It is the current tax law. It’s not a matter of being patriotic or not patriotic. It doesn’t go that the more you pay, the more patriotic you are.

And so what we’ve said — we think it’s fine for us to pay more, because right now we’re paying nothing on that and we leave it over there. But we — like many, many other companies do — wait for the money to come back.

 

In the meantime, it’s important to look at what we do pay. Our marginal rate, our effective rate in the U.S. is over 30 percent. We are the largest taxpayer in the United States. And so we’re not a tax dodger. We pay our share and then some. We don’t have these big loopholes that other people talk about. The only kind of major tax credit that we get is the R&D tax credit, which is available to all companies in the United States. That’s important to know. The second thing I would point out is we have money internationally because we have two-thirds of our business there. So we earn money internationally. We didn’t look for a tax haven or something to put it somewhere. We sell a lot of product everywhere. And we want to bring it back, and we’ve been very honest and straightforward about that.

 

 

http://time.com/4452336/apple-ceo-tim-cook-corporate-tax-reform/

[Andrew 4855]

So uh, I ordered a new phone.

[Happy Face 29]

I need one now too.  Speaker is crackling during calls on my oneplus1.

 

I know a oneplus 3 is the obvious choice now.  But have also been Looking at the Marshall London phone, which has shite specs, but excellent audio.  Dug out my 3rd generation ipod the other week and the sound is so much better than my oneplus.

[PaddockLad 17639]

So uh, I ordered a new phone.

 

so what did you get?...well pleased with my SE tbh, super fast in a way I've never known..

[Andrew 4855]

so what did you get?...well pleased with my SE tbh, super fast in a way I've never known..

 

6S, ordered the phone through GiffGaff and then a sim only plan through vodafone, strangely worked out as my best deal.

[Kid Dynamite 7166]

It won't. I am too btw (other people have iphones you know )

 

I have a 6, which runs fine, my mrs has my previous phone, a 5, which also runs fine.

 

I have an iPad 2 as well and thats still fine, other than its battery being a bit tired.