But play flash sites on a phone, and you'd be REALLY ******, REALLY fast.) On a desktop computer that's plugged into the wall? No problem. Because Flash drains batteries like CRAZY. (This, BTW, is the same reason that iPhones and iPads don't play Flash web sites. FLAC files require heavy computations (decoding) on the fly, which would quickly drain the batteries of iPods, iPhones, and iPads. So, again, this invalidates the cynical claim.)Ĥ. Apps that convert FLAC to iTunes-compatible formats are readily available - even on Apple's Mac App Store!! If Apple didn't want anyone using their FLAC files, why would they allow conversion apps in their own store? (Even if Apple's percentage from the developer is $1, that's far less than they'd make by blocking the apps and making people buy album after album in iTunes. (True or not, it's certainly more plausible than blocking the obscure FLAC as a way to force people to buy music on iTunes.)ģ. Casual reading on the internet reveals there may be some legal issues with Apple including FLAC. (Is it possible Apple believes their lossless format is actually a better, lossless format? Who knows.)Ģ. Apple has its own lossless format (ALAC). So, rather than spewing out opinions, as if they were facts, I'm going to state some actual facts:ġ. You see? When you use your brain to think critically, you start to understand that kneejerk reactions are usually illogical. Do you really think this person exists? Or is it more likely that people who actually use FLAC are far more likely to find another solution, rather than "give up" and buy AACs instead of converting their FLAC files. Since FLAC users are (more or less) audiophiles, I challenge you to find serious FLAC users who, in their frustration, gave up on using FLAC and bought all their music again on iTunes - in the lower-quality AAC format. When you consider the hundreds of millions of Apple customers, how many of them do you think are forced to buy their music on iTunes, simply because iTunes doesn't support FLAC? Furthermore, the types of users who use FLAC are also the types of users who are more likely to search the internet for - and find - a solution to the problem. Yet, in reality, FLAC - the format that isn't supported - is a fairly obscure format. If Apple's goal were to prevent people from playing their own audio files (i.e., those other than AAC, which is sold in iTunes), wouldn't it make more sense to block support for mp3s? I mean, if we're talking "bang for the buck," wouldn't that make more sense and have the most "impact"? I think it's safe to say that the most ubiquitous format is mp3, right? For the sake of discussion, let's assume it is. So, by this guy's logic, why doesn't Apple just block everything except AAC? I mean, if that's their agenda, wouldn't that be the way to do it? If Apple wanted to "force" people to buy their music on iTunes, why allow iTunes to play any of these formats at all (besides Apple's own formats)? iTunes songs are AAC files. Well, if that were true, why wouldn't Apple "block" more audio formats? iTunes currently plays the following: He suggests Apple has "crippled" iTunes by not allowing it to play Flac files in order to force people to instead buy their music on iTunes. (Since we're talking about music, I presume he meant iTunes, not the App Store, because, with the exception of apps that contain music, music is not purchased on the App Store.) This guy (awkwardly) suggests that Apple wants people to download everything from the App Store. I'm amazed how people like this get through life, when they go around making completely fabricated statements that have no basis in reality. This is just apples ways or getting you to download everything from the app store.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |