Live data from Hacker News

Apple Lossless Audio Codec is now open source (Apache license)

alac.macosforge.org

171–180 of 182 posts

Re: Apple Lossless Audio Codec is now open source (Apache license)

#171
post #169
post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

hahaha I don't know which developers you are talking about, just look at the numbers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_Store_(iOS)#Milestones http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AppleAppStoreStatistics.pn... And just because PG said something doesn't dispute the overwhelming success of the app store and the itunes store. There were just as allegedly "legendary" and allegedly "influential" (seriously, what influence and…

First of all, where are the applications in Google search? You just type in what you want, and the system uses AI to provide you with an answer. The fact that you can do that without having to think about millions of arbitrary applications is largely why it is so great. The fact is that people don't have an intuitive understanding of applications like "iTunes" they just have ideas of tasks like "listen to music." So…

Google is way more than just google-search and has been for a long, long time. Those are the google applications I am talking about; all the different ways google gets data from you through allegedly free services. And they track you as best as they can and you cannot change that. You can use them but of course you don't have to. Same with apple. Don't like it, don't use it.

And yea, I get it, you like google search, alright... no ned to repeat it all the time. There are better search engines out there. And other people like their macs, iphones, ipads. You think you are smarter than other people to show them what they like is wrong? Preposterous.

iTunes works just fine and it is free. Apple software overall is generally considered very intuitive and I know a lot of total computer beginners who can use OS X and especially the ipad just fine. This is an absolutely ridiculous statement.

> about how they have been screwing us over

Do you have a single app in the iTunes app store? No? Then what are you complaining about? Or do you see yourself as some sort of vigilante and defender of all those "helpless" devs?

Do you really think devs who built iOS apps need _YOU_ of all people to "help" them understand how the appstore works? Do you really think they are not as smart as you and have nooooo idea what they got themselves into? This is outrageous.

You can develop for droid, win 7 or webos or plain old java programs for pre-smartphone mobiles or chrome apps or just some regular software. The possibilities are almost unlimited. If you don't like how apple conducts business and distributes software through the appstore, just don't develop any iOS apps and don't buy any. You won't miss out...

Again, in your own little black-and-white world you are making up Apple to be some sort of super-evil that is practically mind-controlling you and raping you for your money and freedom when they neither have a monopoly in any of the markets they are in nor are you stuck for choices and alternatives. End of story. You have absolutely no grounds for your ridiculous and completely empty claims. It all comes down to: don't like it then dont use it. That's it.

You are in absolutely NO position to tell any software or hardware company how to do business as long as what they are doing is legal. If you don't like what they are doing, don't buy their products and make your own alternatives or buy shit from their competitors.

Re: Apple Lossless Audio Codec is now open source (Apache license)

#172
post #170
post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before you blame me for argument for authority, notice that rolfd's post is already ridiculously exaggerated because he said "it has an unbelievable positive impact."

Tu quoque fallacies are just as bad. Anyone using emotive words or unnecessary superlatives undermine the point they are attempting to make.

Forget it.

Re: Apple Lossless Audio Codec is now open source (Apache license)

#173
post #158
post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but at least Google's main goal is deliver intelligent services like search and machine translation And at last Apple's goal is to deliver easily usable, reliable and sexy hardware and software and they are forerunners in quite a few markets they created on their own. See, that marketing-babble works even for Microsoft and Oracle too. Google's goal is to get as much diverse data from you as possible and legal. Stop…

> And on top of that they were pretty much the only search engine for the web for a long time, so much so that "google" has become synonymous with internet for the average user. There are a variety of industries which can be classified as natural monopolies [1], examples of this include public utilities like water services, electricity, and telecommunications. It is too expensive for a competitor to arise in these in…

> natural monopoly

You are constantly making completely false claims and you are wrongly using words and terms. Utility computing and grid computing has got nothing to do with google's search engine.

Internet search is in absolutely no way even remotely a "natural monopoly". I could set up my own search engine with a few bucks investment just like Larry and Sergey did plus nowadays storage is even cheaper.

> so it is most efficient to have a central distributor

So in case of Google it is a "good" monopoly because it will save costs???? Are you out of your mind? I don't pay for a google search like I pay for my kWh and google does not provide any public infrastructure. They feed off the internet and feed off on my data and make money that way. They are a company, not a utility.

> You also mentioned "all the flak they are getting," could you provide specifics?

Well for starters, look at all the "Apple=Nazi" bullshit and blind hatred this guy wrote: http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=jhuni

> DRM

There is no DRM on my iMac or in my iTunes songs. I can export my photos, videos, contacts, my emails, my documents and everything else I have on my PCs and take it with me at any point. I am in control of everything that is going on on my PC here and I can also install lots of other OSs if I want that.

> evil things like restricting users with DRM

Well, you really must be smarter than everyone else because with a good 100 million iPhones sold, you would think MOST customers would have quickly dumped them as soon as they hit all those horrible road blocks you are seeing... but no, iphones keep selling and a lot of people enjoy using them. So they must have gotten something right for just that target audience.

You need to learn to accept that obviously apple does not care about some bean-foil deflector beanie defender of all developers who sees them as the worst kind of Naziscum. So needless to say, they won't be making any products for you whether you like it or not. There is nothing more to this discussion than that.

> Could you show me what alternatives you are referring to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_online_music_stor...

You need to plug the RIAA with your DRM hatred because they are (were) making those terms.

> PyMusique

Someone illegally reverse engineered a tool to hack around the RIAA-dictated DRM protection and you are wondering that apple plugged (had to plug) that hole? Go hate on the RIAA for that you. There is absolutely no justification that any company is required to open their services up to any third-party clients if they do not want it or as in this case aren't able to allow it. Do not bring this irrelevant argument up again. Ever.

> Apple still uses DRM extensively today

I have no drm on my imac or macbook pro.

> with the freedom from being forced into things by big corporations like Apple and Microsoft.

You are wrong. You are completely, utterly wrong. Neither apple nor microsoft forces people to use anything. If you don't like it, don't use it. You don't get it huh? You must really think you are so much smarter than everyone around you because you obviously believe you are in a position to question all those millions worldwide who decided to buy an apple product.

Back before apple could sell a single home-PC, there was pretty much only x86 and microsoft for pretty much all PCs. To this day GNU/Linux has obviously utterly failed to make it to the average user's desktop at large so people were stuck with Windows. At least apple could grab a few of those percents and bring a little bit of competition to that huge market. Look at the numbers:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/Operating...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_system...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/Smartphon...

Apple is looking at 10% share (less than 20% for mobiles), the rest is pretty much exclusively M$... Linux is at less than 3% total where they always were. This is no tyranny, this is not forcing nobody to use apple. You make it look like they own 99% of everything. Completely ridiculous and wrong.

If anything you should be thankful that at least there is a LITTLE bit of competition for M$ but you are probably much too ignorant, stuck up and also too young to remember the dark ages when there was nothing but M$ for most computer users.

> You blame me of being a "fandroid"

I blame you for mindlessly repeating retarded, false propaganda and for not seeing things for what they are. Apple has small market shares in everything they do. And I blame you for continuously thinking you know better than all those people who consciously decided to switch to Apple products and find that they like it.

> Yet you a clearly a huge fan of Apple

I am pretty much fluent on all windows, unix, linux and mac system as well as more exotic ones like Be. I really do not care much what I am using as long as it works reliably and comfortably enough. I have seen M$ go from horrible DOS to WinDOS to Vista and 7 and I have seen Atari and Commodore and I have seen Linux and BSD go from flipping every single kernel switch before compiling it myself to dragonfly and ubuntu and whatnot... and I have seen apple from their first little black and white interface to their very first "sexy" products to their switch to Intel and I have seen the iPod help them rise in popularity, then the popular macs and finally the iPhone and iPad. Trust me, I been around the block and I belong to no single camp. I "hate" companies like Microsoft, SAP and Oracle - real actual major players and true monopolists that make atrociously bad software. Not comparatively little fish like Apple.

Back in the day apple used to be so far ahead of x86 PCs it was ridiculous. Now they are Intels just the same. I am no apple fanboy, I like some of their stuff and they have made my life easier. But the one thing where I give Apple real credit is that they were the only ones to successfully bring actual competition to the PC market, even at just 10%. They were the only ones to date to give M$ a run for their money and make M$ finally look retarded, old and horrible. And they have CREATED the modern smartphone and tablet market, things that did not exist before. Finally all those average PC users have a real choice available and there is at least SOME competition which can only benefit all of us. So if you really hate big corps then you should shit on M$ and on google and thank the wolfram alphas and DDGs and also Apple in this world because they were the only ones who could stand up against a real monopoly.

And you know why Linux on the desktop failed to deliver this much needed competition? Because open source and free software is sadly full of ADHD attention whores and people who think they know it oh-so-much-better than the users and they will go to great length shitting on anyone who is just a little bit more successful than they are - which is exactly how I see you. All that choice and possibilities are great for us geeks, so is OS and FSF, but the average user doesn't care about gnome vs kde vs xfce and they don't care about compiling kernels or being able to browse the code. (Even you haven't!!!) They actually have a life that is NOT the computer and they just want to send an email and talk to their family at home, send them pictures and read something interesting online... and that is what apple has obviously delivered, otherwise they wouldn't have the success they currently have.

So it doesn't matter what PG or whoever says, apple's success has proven them all wrong and I can only say I am thankful for the bit of competition and a few neat gadgets that apple delivered.

You are just a troll.

Re: Apple Lossless Audio Codec is now open source (Apache license)

#174
post #168
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now I see what you mean, but I wouldn't say your source is reliable. I can see where your opinion comes from, but you should consider more sources. Most of those points are either incorrect or don't take into account what the goal of all companies on this planet is. Making money. Ideology is good for yourself but won't feed you or buy you a house. A middle ground is the way to go. And Apples middle ground is quality…

Apple won't give me iOS, yet Google will give me more then enough of Android. Google FTW. I rest my case.

> Google will give me

Yet google will not give you any code to their actual core services.

> Google FTW. I rest my case.

Yea, this is what this whole "discussion" has been about... go figure, you were right from the beginning until now!!! Congratulations, you haven't learned a thing. You are either mentally 14 years old or just a troll. GTFO.

Re: Apple Lossless Audio Codec is now open source (Apache license)

#175
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

consumer products that actually support it?

FLAC has been supported by Rockbox http://www.rockbox.org/ since 2005.. I remember using it in my iriver H300, iPods were supported as well

well yeah, decoders exist. Rockbox doesn't qualify as a "consumer product" in the sense I was using the term. IE, walk into my local electronics store and pick up a device and take it to the till. Good point (to the other poster) about the squeezebox though, quite correct.

Re: Apple Lossless Audio Codec is now open source (Apache license)

#176
post #171
post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, where are the applications in Google search? You just type in what you want, and the system uses AI to provide you with an answer. The fact that you can do that without having to think about millions of arbitrary applications is largely why it is so great. The fact is that people don't have an intuitive understanding of applications like "iTunes" they just have ideas of tasks like "listen to music." So…

Google is way more than just google-search and has been for a long, long time. Those are the google applications I am talking about; all the different ways google gets data from you through allegedly free services. And they track you as best as they can and you cannot change that. You can use them but of course you don't have to. Same with apple. Don't like it, don't use it. And yea, I get it, you like google search,…

> Google is way more than just google-search and has been for a long, long time.

Google is mainly an intelligent services company. Their main intelligent service is search, and other services such as machine translation and intelligent prediction are also provided. [1][2]

Besides services, Google actively develops many open platforms, such as Chromium and Android. Many of their attempts to build simple applications have failed. [3]

> You can use them but of course you don't have to. Same with apple. Don't like it, don't use it.

People aren't fully aware of the fact that Apple/Microsoft exert control over their devices with operating systems such as Windows 7 and iOS. In the free software movement we are trying to get people to realize this through campaigns against these systems. [4] [5]

If you try to get everyone like me to shut up whenever whenever we criticize Apple/Microsoft then people won't be able to make educated choices.

> And other people like their macs, iphones, ipads. You think you are smarter than other people to show them what they like is wrong?

You clearly don't know me at all, so please stop personally attacking me. I certainly don't think I am "better then other people."

I want to educate people about the corrupt activities of Apple/Microsoft and develop better alternatives based upon Linux and web technologies. Google has been an essential ally in this effort.

> Apple software overall is generally considered very intuitive.

I don't know how you qualify "very intuitive", however, it is counter-intuitive to base a system on applications like iTunes rather then tasks. See away with applications by Aza Raskins and the anti-mac interface by Jakob Nielson. [6] [7]

> nor are you stuck for choices and alternatives.

You are wrong about this. There simply is not an abundance of free choices out there for people. Apple/Microsoft have totally dominated the computer industry since it started during the PC revolution nearly 25 years ago. Even now that free Linux alternatives like Ubuntu and Android have emerged, they still aren't widely available.

> You are in absolutely NO position to tell any software or hardware company how to do business as long as what they are doing is legal.

One thing our legal system still provides us with is freedom of speech. So I am still free to educate everyone about the harm that the tyrannies of Apple/Microsoft have inflicted upon the computing industry over the last ~25 years. On the other hand, apparently you think I should just buy my products and suck it up, rather then talking about this.

[1] http://translate.google.com/

[2] http://code.google.com/apis/predict/

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Google_products#Discont...

[4] http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/iphone

[5] http://en.windows7sins.org/

[6] http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6856727143023456694

[7] http://www.useit.com/papers/anti-mac.html

Re: Apple Lossless Audio Codec is now open source (Apache license)

#177
post #174
post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple won't give me iOS, yet Google will give me more then enough of Android. Google FTW. I rest my case.

> Google will give me Yet google will not give you any code to their actual core services. > Google FTW. I rest my case. Yea, this is what this whole "discussion" has been about... go figure, you were right from the beginning until now!!! Congratulations, you haven't learned a thing. You are either mentally 14 years old or just a troll. GTFO.

* > Yet google will not give you any code to their actual core services.*

Which aren't even installed on my computer!

Re: Apple Lossless Audio Codec is now open source (Apache license)

#178
post #173
post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And on top of that they were pretty much the only search engine for the web for a long time, so much so that "google" has become synonymous with internet for the average user. There are a variety of industries which can be classified as natural monopolies [1], examples of this include public utilities like water services, electricity, and telecommunications. It is too expensive for a competitor to arise in these in…

> natural monopoly You are constantly making completely false claims and you are wrongly using words and terms. Utility computing and grid computing has got nothing to do with google's search engine. Internet search is in absolutely no way even remotely a "natural monopoly". I could set up my own search engine with a few bucks investment just like Larry and Sergey did plus nowadays storage is even cheaper. > so it is…

Dear kahawe,

Over 25 years ago, in the mid 1980s, Apple introduced the Macintosh and Microsoft introduced Windows. Taken together, Apple/Microsoft came to dominate the entire computing industry and they have largely maintained that status up to the present day.

Well they may have switched around in cycles between one another, to the point that it may have seemed that "there was nothing but M$ for most computer users" taken together they still had complete control. The phrase "if you don't like it, don't use it" didn't make any sense, because there were simply were no free alternatives for people to turn to.

Selecting between Apple/M$ is not a worthwhile choice, since they both use exactly the same bad practices. They both profit off of closed and restrictive platforms, and they are both against software freedom.

It is only in the last three years that people begun to be granted some freedom from the tyrannies of Apple and Microsoft. This started in 2004, when Ubuntu was released, and then it continued when in 2008 Android was released. In the last three years these two systems have matured to the point that now finally users have the choice of living free of Apple/M$.

The transition to these free alternatives was partially fueled by the need to save money admist our financial crisis, but that alone hasn't really displaced the dominance of these entrenched tyrannies because as you personally mentioned, Linux may still only be 3% of all web client operating systems. This is why it is necessary to have people like me who continue to fight against Apple and Microsoft and develop free alternatives.

Google has been one of our greatest allies in this battle. Google is a major proponent of open platforms, because Google needs platforms like the web that are open to searching. Google has further assisted our cause through their active development of Chromium and Android. Furthermore, Google provides many unmatched intelligent services such as search, machine translation, and intelligent prediction to everyone free of charge, not unlike a public service.

> google does not provide any public infrastructure

The fire department doesn't provide any public infrastructure either. It provides a public service. This is not unlike how our good friends at Google provide public services such as search and machine translation.

> I could set up my own search engine with a few bucks investment just like Larry and Sergey did plus nowadays storage is even cheaper.

Sure you could, and nobody would hear about it unless you further invested millions of dollars into it to acquire resources.

> So if you really hate big corps then you should shit on M$

I hate M$ just about as much as Apple, however, I tend to think of them together because taken as a group they inflicted untold evils on the computing industry for nearly 25 years.

> If anything you should be thankful that at least there is a LITTLE bit of competition for M$ but you are probably much too ignorant, stuck up and also too young to remember the dark ages when there was nothing but M$ for most computer users.

What makes you think that we are not still amidst such a dark age? Microsoft and Apple together still dominate most general purpose computers. As I explained above, I am not at all thankful of Apple's attempts to compete with Microsoft because they offer nothing I consider to be better.

> If anything you should be thankful that at least there is a LITTLE bit of competition for M$ but you are probably much too ignorant, stuck up and also too young to remember the dark ages when there was nothing but M$ for most computer users.

Actually, as of Q3 2011, Apple is the largest publicly traded company in the world by market capitalization, and the largest technology company in the world by revenue and profit. Apple simply is not a "little fish" anymore. In fact, Apple/Microsoft have tyrannically controlled the computing industry for nearly 25 years.

> Not comparatively little fish like Apple.

What do you mean by "little fish"? Apple is a huge company and arguably the main opponent of computing freedom in the world today.

> Neither apple nor microsoft forces people to use anything.

As I explained above, Apple/Microsoft have controlled the computing industry for nearly 25 years. Computers have become an unavoidable part of life in developed countries, so people basically are forced to deal with them one way or another. Free alternatives have only recently begun to emerge, but they are still not widely available.

> So it doesn't matter what PG or whoever says, apple's success has proven them all wrong and I can only say I am thankful for the bit of competition and a few neat gadgets that apple delivered.

Thankfully, I don't take success in capitalism into account in my comparasions. I could care less about how successful Apple has been in capitalist societies, I want free, secure, and intelligent technologies. Apple and Microsoft aren't even beginning to work towards that goal and at least Google is.

Re: Apple Lossless Audio Codec is now open source (Apache license)

#179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I paraphrased. It was done for brevity. Did i misrepresent the intent of your post? I do not need to google it, becauase i can hear it myself. Like i say, not subtle. I haven't got vinyls/rips of everything, but i can assure you it is not uncommon. Must i provide examples? Destructive 'loudening' of music is not useful with vinyl music (IE. compressing the waveform 'up' does not make for a louder output, as what happ…

> I do not need to google it, becauase i can hear it myself Try doing an ABX comparison of whatever it is you think you can hear, and then talk to me. > Must i provide examples? Prove it to yourself first with a representative sampling of vinyl records and a blind waveform analysis. > Destructive 'loudening' of music is not useful with vinyl music That's true in theory. It's also true that destructive loudening of mu…

You are stubborn as a mule.

I have done ABX. Like i said 1000 times, it wasn't subtle. I don't need 'a representative sample', i wasn't arguing 'all' or 'most', but 'not uncommon'.

Re: Apple Lossless Audio Codec is now open source (Apache license)

#180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I do not need to google it, becauase i can hear it myself Try doing an ABX comparison of whatever it is you think you can hear, and then talk to me. > Must i provide examples? Prove it to yourself first with a representative sampling of vinyl records and a blind waveform analysis. > Destructive 'loudening' of music is not useful with vinyl music That's true in theory. It's also true that destructive loudening of mu…

You are stubborn as a mule. I have done ABX. Like i said 1000 times, it wasn't subtle. I don't need 'a representative sample', i wasn't arguing 'all' or 'most', but 'not uncommon'.

> Like i said 1000 times, it wasn't subtle.

Yes, the distortions and noise added by even the most pristine vinyl reproduction aren't subtle.

Post reply on HN