[Vincent Ferrari]

http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/15/...apple-licensed/

"Sigh, it looks like Apple's habit of squeezing iPod accessory manufacturers for license fees has now extended to freaking headphones -- iLounge is reporting that the new iPod shuffle can only be controlled by headphones with a special hardware authentication chip. That means that third parties will have to pay Apple for the privilege of making shuffle-compatible accessories, and you can bet they'll just pass that cost right on to consumers -- we wouldn't expect any cheap headphone adapters or inexpensive replacement headphones for this thing."

I'm so tired of the idiots making this uproar.  Really. There's no requirement to buy a new Shuffle.  If your old one works, fine.  Enjoy it.  If it doesn't, but an old one if you simply must use your $4,000 custom moulded headphones on a $79 music player.  As usual, the "everything must be free" people forget to examine the obvious: these aren't regular headphones.  They're the remote control for the player unit that sits in your pocket.  They do more than just put the music into that cavernous void you call a skull; they actually are the controls for the device, so of course they aren't going to be standard buds, and of course Apple is going to put a chip in there to do its thing.

Has Apple "locked out" third parties?  Nope.  The same ones who proudly stamped that "Made for iPod" logo on their stuff can still make Shuffle headphones or adapters if they so choose.  If you weren't in that program and just producing plain vanilla headphones, then your buds ain't gonna work here.  Sorry.

Am I happy that Apple took the controls off the Shuffle itself?  Not terribly, but the frothing seething outrage over this stupid little chip and the association of it with the most famous boogeyman of the modern era, DRM, is laughable to say the least.  Get over it people and tell the guy next to you with a gun at your temple that you're an independent enough thinker to not buy a device you don't like.

End rant.

[Vincent Ferrari]

http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/15/...apple-licensed/

"Sigh, it looks like Apple's habit of squeezing iPod accessory manufacturers for license fees has now extended to freaking headphones -- iLounge is reporting that the new iPod shuffle can only be controlled by headphones with a special hardware authentication chip. That means that third parties will have to pay Apple for the privilege of making shuffle-compatible accessories, and you can bet they'll just pass that cost right on to consumers -- we wouldn't expect any cheap headphone adapters or inexpensive replacement headphones for this thing."

I'm so tired of the idiots making this uproar.  Really. There's no requirement to buy a new Shuffle.  If your old one works, fine.  Enjoy it.  If it doesn't, but an old one if you simply must use your $4,000 custom moulded headphones on a $79 music player.  As usual, the "everything must be free" people forget to examine the obvious: these aren't regular headphones.  They're the remote control for the player unit that sits in your pocket.  They do more than just put the music into that cavernous void you call a skull; they actually are the controls for the device, so of course they aren't going to be standard buds, and of course Apple is going to put a chip in there to do its thing.

Has Apple "locked out" third parties?  Nope.  The same ones who proudly stamped that "Made for iPod" logo on their stuff can still make Shuffle headphones or adapters if they so choose.  If you weren't in that program and just producing plain vanilla headphones, then your buds ain't gonna work here.  Sorry.

Am I happy that Apple took the controls off the Shuffle itself?  Not terribly, but the frothing seething outrage over this stupid little chip and the association of it with the most famous boogeyman of the modern era, DRM, is laughable to say the least.  Get over it people and tell the guy next to you with a gun at your temple that you're an independent enough thinker to not buy a device you don't like.

End rant.

[Dyvim]

While I don't really get all the uproar over the new shuffle and agree with your "If you don't like it, then don't buy it" mentality, I do think Apple has gone a little far with the chip thing. I understand that the controls are in the earbuds. I actually really like the remote controls on my iPhone earbuds (which lack the volume controls). But they didn't have to put in a requirement for an Apple authentication chip. Note that even my Apple-made iPhone earbuds with mic and remote won't work with the shuffle (sure they don't have volume but the action button should work for play\pause\prev\next\etc). This is different than what happened with the iPhone: headphone makers were required to produce adaptors or new headphones to include the iPhone mic\remote feature, but they didn't have to license an Apple chip to do so. This time apparently they will have to license this chip and said cost will be past on to consumers. I see no reason why relatively new headphones made last year for iPhone shouldn't work (minus volume control) with the shuffle- if they had an inline volume slider, then you'd have volume control too, but they won't. Anyway, on that level, it's hard to see this move as anything but yet another cash grab by Apple.

[Vincent Ferrari]

Originally Posted by Dyvim

Anyway, on that level, it's hard to see this move as anything but yet another cash grab by Apple.

You're probably 100% right, but in the end, if no one buys into it, it'll be the last time. The truth is, as someone noted previously (either here or on Digital Home Thoughts) most people are perfectly happy with the included earbuds, so for a good chunk of the population, this discussion means nothing. If you already own $200 headphones, there's a good chance you won't be plugging them into a Shuffle anyway.

There is a target market for the Shuffle. If you don't like it or something about it, it may not be for you. That's how I look at all Apple products in general.

[Dyvim]

Originally Posted by Vincent Ferrari

You're probably 100% right, but in the end, if no one buys into it, it'll be the last time.

I bet these things sell like hotcakes despite all the outrage in the blogosphere.

Originally Posted by Vincent Ferrari

The truth is, as someone noted previously (either here or on Digital Home Thoughts) most people are perfectly happy with the included earbuds, so for a good chunk of the population, this discussion means nothing. If you already own $200 headphones, there's a good chance you won't be plugging them into a Shuffle anyway.

I'm more of a $15 headphone guy than a $200 headphone guy. My issue is that I never really liked earbuds at all- I've always preferred the old Walkman style headphones with an arc that rests on top of your head. I'm using the included earbuds with my iPhone when I'm out and about despite my gripes about the earbud fit solely because I find the remote so handy. But that's a no go in the gym because the earbuds definitely won't stay in then. I might consider this shuffle if there were cheap alternate headsets available, but they probably never will be. I suppose I could use an adapter but then the convenient (for me) placement of the remote is lost since the adaptor will either be right next to where it plugs into the shuffle or else you'll have a cable management problem (too much cord) if the adaptor is made long. The advent of the authentication chip pretty much rules out cheap 3rd party alternatives. Oh well.

People will be really pissed in a year or two when Apple releases the next shuffle where the earbuds ARE the shuffle.

[crimsonsky]

Originally Posted by Vincent Ferrari

If you already own $200 headphones, there's a good chance you won't be plugging them into a Shuffle anyway.

Exactly. I'm not going to plug my $400 M-Audio IE-40s into a Shuffle. If I were to buy a Shuffle (and I'm not), I'd probably just stick with the earbuds.

[Janak Parekh]

On cue, iLounge posts a new editorial on the subject with some salacious details. I don't care about the shuffle itself (in fact, comment 9 in the thread suggests it is not DRM), but this "don't discuss" stuff does bother me a bit. Not that I'd expect differently, but I can still be bothered a little.

Update: a nice non-hysteric discussion on Ars' apple blog.

--janak

[Vincent Ferrari]

Originally Posted by Janak Parekh

On cue, iLounge posts a new editorial on the subject with some salacious details. I don't care about the shuffle itself (in fact, comment 9 in the thread suggests it is not DRM), but this "don't discuss" stuff does bother me a bit. Not that I'd expect differently, but I can still be bothered a little.

--janak

All these critics would have a point IF and ONLY IF the Shuffle used standard headphones and wouldn't work with anything but Apple's buds. The people bitching about the first gen iPhone had a much stronger case than the people complaining about the Shuffle because that was just ludicrous. Even Apple realized it and changed it!

This whole Shuffle thing is, in my opinion, just an excuse for Apple bashers to get their rocks off and for the interminably oppressed to be oppressed even further.

[Janak Parekh]

Originally Posted by Vincent Ferrari

All these critics would have a point IF and ONLY IF the Shuffle used standard headphones and wouldn't work with anything but Apple's buds. The people bitching about the first gen iPhone had a much stronger case than the people complaining about the Shuffle because that was just ludicrous. Even Apple realized it and changed it!

Yeah, that's a specific example why I do believe that it's not a DRM mechanism. The Ars article I just linked to suggested the authentication is there for sanity checking's sake. But people like to get excited over stuff, and Apple manages to polarize like no other.

I personally won't be buying the Shuffle, because I like to use my earbuds. But that's too reasoned a response to talk about...

--janak

[Vincent Ferrari]

Originally Posted by Janak Parekh

I personally won't be buying the Shuffle, because I like to use my earbuds. But that's too reasoned a response to talk about...

--janak

I got it because for what I use it for (the exercise bike / treadmill and house cleaning) it's absolutely perfect. In honesty, it'll probably rarely ever leave my house; that's what I have my iPhone for!

That's why I said that Apple makes things targeted at specific markets / niches. If you don't like a product it's probably because it wasn't intended for you in the first place!

But you're right; that's all way too reasoned.

[Janak Parekh]

Originally Posted by Vincent Ferrari

I got it because for what I use it for (the exercise bike / treadmill and house cleaning) it's absolutely perfect. In honesty, it'll probably rarely ever leave my house; that's what I have my iPhone for!

I'd get it for exercise, but I like more clip-on-style earbuds for that. I'm sure those will be available at some time, and then I'll evaluate it for my workouts, especially now that it has playlist selection (the one major omission from the old units).

--janak