And now a reply post.

Originally Posted By: Dignan
Whatever I think about Apple's copying of Android (which come on, they did), I sincerely hope you're not reading on your phone while in the car unless you're at a stoplight or pulled over. If you are, please don't drive in the DC area, we have enough of that already. Thanks.

I only would do this when the iPhone was in a car mount, and I was using it for GPS. I don't actively text while driving, but being able to read incoming messages even at a glance allow me to know if it's time to pull over to respond to something immediately, or keep going. Such is the life of being on call. Thankfully now that the new system isn't modal, I don't have to touch the phone at all to resume viewing my GPS route info.

Originally Posted By: tonyc
I will reserve judgement on Lion until I use it, but I, for one, do not welcome IOSization of OS X. If it's just the UI glossy layer that gets unified between the two, I can probably live with that, but if they start taking away the ability to get under the hood and use it like a real computer, I'm checking out.

I'm not going to say much here since I am technically covered by a Lion NDA, but I do agree with your checking out part. My personal opinion is that Apple won't likely kill off the under the hood power user stuff anytime soon, especially with their continued interest in the high end video production market. Final Cut X was a good reassurance that Apple has some stake planted in the pro field still. I do see them slowly moving the defaults of the system to be more and more consumer friendly, based on what they learn from the iOS side. The iCloud document syncing for Pages, the auto save, and versioning all speak of features for general consumers to make the experience easier, but at the same time adds some tools for power users. I already have used Time Machine as a sort of VCS feature for a few things, having it baked in properly will be even better. I can even see a day where Apple disallows installing apps except from the App Store, but there will likely be a setting somewhere to turn this restriction off. Out of the box the common consumer will likely not care, and they will benefit too since this closes the malware problem off (well, mostly, I know no system can ever be 100% secure). And for those of us who care, we have one switch to flip. Similar to side loading applications on Android today. Default is off, but it's in there to turn on.

Originally Posted By: tonyc
Apple's just going to "upgrade" you to AAC 256k whether you like it or not. Eventually, everyone's just going to fall in line with buying from Apple to avoid the hassle. I wonder who will be the first to release a tool that defeats Apple's "matching" algorithm (so that the files fail the match and are therefore imported into your library as-is) without adversely affecting sound quality...

The one thing that seems to differentiate the Apple thing from MP3.com (which I used back in the day) is that MP3.com was streaming your collection, whereas the Apple iCloud thing is (from what I've been able to gather) just pushing the files around to all of your devices. .
Originally Posted By: DWallach
I'm not sure what the "upgrade" will do if your tunes are ripped at higher quality. All of mine are in Apple Lossless, for example. If Apple "upgraded" me to 256kbit/sec compressed audio, I wouldn't be amused.

As for the 256kb AAC part, I really don't care (though I understand others do). To me, they sound just the same as 320kbit MP3 (my old standard). At least the "upgrade" isn't going to transcode your existing files into the AAC 256kbit file, instead it's just a copy of their AAC created from (in theory) a master lossless source. With my collection, I'm expecting a lot to not match, as I have a lot of odd music in my collection that has never really been sold directly. Things like soundtracks ripped from games back when they used CD Audio and such. The lack of streaming though does seem odd to me.


Edited by drakino (07/06/2011 04:08)
Edit Reason: removed a piece