Brian is honest enough to admit:
what I'm doing here is welcoming a DRM-enabled proprietary format just because it's Mac-only, whereas under other circumstances I'd be jeering at DRM-enabled proprietary formats that are Windows-only.
He speculates that if Apple's new music-download service is successful, it might also transfer to the PC side, but this misses the point - that would be further supporting a DRM-proprietary format. Of course, it might also drive Mac sales! which of course is always the dominant moral imperative, trumping all other concerns.
It's reasonable to ask, that if Microsoft were to roll out such a service, based on WMA DRM and was PC-only but might eventually move to Mac also, would this also be cause for "knee-jerk satisfaction" ?
This is a dark move by Apple. If they do "upgrade" the firmware on iPoD to use this new DRM-laden format, then that reduces the quality of iPod. It subverts the entire campaign of Apple's "think different" philosophy. It promotes Big Corporate Control at the expense of fair use.
This means that Apple is the Dark Side and if you care a whit about freedom, fair use, and consumer's rights, you should never buy a Mac, never support Apple, ever again. I was in fact this close to considering the new TiBooks myself but they'vve lost me completely, forever.
Of course, Apple doesn;'t see it that way. They still think that their grossly overpriced, underperforming PCs are, despite $4000 pricetags, "computing for the common man" and that fancy window kerning and color sync features that not even enthusiasts like Brian ever use or need somehow compensate. In fact, this perception is essential for Apple's marketing if they are going to entice the labels to release their music libraries for download, because the RIAA needs to believe that it can control the entire flow of music to consumers via the computer. So in one sense the RIAA and Apple have a shared goal.
The friend of my enemy...