*DAMN R6 Forum

Wow,

It seems that Hewlett Packard has just secured the rights to get the ability to produce ipods to stop Bill gates cornering of the PC market by Apple 2 days ago.  It seems that HP is allowed to use the software and design that Ipod uses on the condition that every new Hewlett Packard come equipped with Apple's Itunes built into the software.  As far as I know there is also a prototype of the new Hewlett Packard Ipod that looks almost the same but is Silver instead of White like the traditional Ipod from Apple.  well, it looks like Mr. Gates will have another hurtle to cross when it comes to cornering the PC market now  ;D  Anyway, what do you guys think about HP making their own Ipod with Apple software built in it?

:MoD:Saberian

http://www.macminute.com/images/db/hpdigitalmusicplayer


Microsoft had somthing to say about all this (surprise suprise)

IT'S SO UGLY.

I dunno i think thats a bit harsh! It is after all exactly the same design - but with a 'pc' color. (which i admit looks shit). I think apples 'white' design is far nicer - and should sell better - hell why would people choose to buy a HP branded ipod over an Apple branded ipod?... unless of course HP are gonna sell the thing for ?60 less or somthing...

well, as long as these pcPods aren't cutting into ipod sales too badly (which i'm hoping the folks at apple though about, but hell sculley basically sold Microsoft the mac os to use as windows so nothing is certain)  i don't see how this can be a bad thing for apple.  it would expose more pc users to apple technology (along with ease of use) and may persuade them to buy a mac eventually

Perhaps Jobs is going to actually get some profit out of those iTunes Music Store sales soon and is just looking for a bigger piece of that market by placing the ITMS on all of HP's computers.

true, in that sense it seems like a fantastic move - all those PC users who will use the ITMS, and then tell their friends about it... etc... No wonder Microsoft are (excuss my french) Shitting their pants about it. It could hugly boost the coverage of the ITMS - and maybe Jobs reckons in the long term that it is worth it despite the introduction off compertition to the windows compatable ipod...

This seems very hypocritical of both Apple and Steve Jobs because this is tantamount to making clones. For years Apple has resisted allowing clones on to the market because of its "concerns" about quality, etc etc so the move allowing HP to make iPods is puzzling.

The argument of selling more songs via iTunes wouldn't be a strong one because the profit margin per song coming from iTunes isn't enough to warrant Apple opening up its patents to another manufacturer. I don't see what Apple has to gain from an economic point of view - unless it is trying to take a direct swipe at Microsoft's Window's Media Player. It should all pan out, but at this time it seems like a foolish move on Apple's part.

It looks like an ugly little child that was rejected from the Apple test facility :o

Couple points: this isn't a true clone in the sense of the UMAX/Power/Motorola clones of yesteryear - those were non-Apple hardware designs and configurations running an Apple OS.  The new iPod, AFAIK, is the same design as the Apple iPod, running the same OS (so to speak), and is basically a re-painted, re-logo'd Apple product.  Additionally, Apple doesn't build much of its own hardware - most is done by third-party manufacturers, who are building Dells, Toshibas, and everyone else's too.

As for the iTMS and whatnot, I don't think this is about selling more songs for the money, but for the technology - every song sold is one more AAC-encoded digital file and one less WMA-encoded file in the public use.  This isn't about money, it's about technology adoption and getting your codec out to more people faster.  The iTMS has never truly been about making money on song downloads.

Has anyone else questioned the logic of why you would pay $250 for a 4 gig iPod when you get get a 15 gig iPod for only $50 more? If you are going to blow a wad on a digital music player, might as well spend the extra $50 and get one that not only is 3.75 times larger but looks a hell of a lot better. The mini Pods would have been a great idea if they cost $100 less and didn't look like absolute shit. They are the most fru fru girly looking thing I have ever seen.

Perhaps the inclusion of itunes on so many pcs, in jobs eyes, is a possitive that far outweighs possible negatives.

Tasty, I got one because I only have 3.4 gigs worht of music and I would like to smaller size for running and working out.  And the silver aint too bad.

This is why he is doing it Straight from the Apple Site (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2004/jan/08hp.html)

They have an agreement that most HP computers will come pre-equipped with the iTunes music store. They didn't sell the design for the mini though. I think they want people to see how iTunes is so easy to use and venture out to see how Apple computers are to use too.

.... btw looks like the Silver mini iPod is the most popular currently... at least according to Amazon.

BFG, duh.

yeah i know.. but well i think the golden one looks quite smexy and the blue one isn't to bad either... Although how any self respecting person could buy a pink mini ipod i just do no know.... Its not even close to being a decent colour!

My 4 year old daughter would LOVE the pink one!  That's why they make them in pink.....for GIRLS silly.

Silly me. It will be Fluffy pink mini ipods next.. and you'll be able to to get interchangable covers to fit your outfit! oh god. oh god

I agree with the person who said that mini I pods should be 100$ less and I also agree with the person that said that those hp I pods look like shit.  

I think that apple shouldn't allow this until all those goddamning computer companies that make games software and every thing in between start recognizing macs and make things for them too.

Microsoft sux 8)

U just can't produce one of those mini ipods for under $100 - I just don't think its gonna happen for a long while.... the hp ipods are just a different colour, yeah i think the colour sucks and i definatly prefer the white - but the design is the same and hell i would'nt say the mac ipods look shit!

This deal is putting both Quicktime, itunes and Rendevouze on every HP computer from now... IF that is not a good thing then i don't know what is! It is spreading mac software and technologies withiin a broader market and that can only be a good thing for apple and its reputation.

One PC person that I know after using iTunes is considering getting a mac, or at least a minipod first. Small steps my friends, small steps.

Yah it is good to spead apple software but they shouldn't spread their software if everyone else won't.

Someone has to make the first move scratch. The great thing about the spread of the rendevouz software is that more and more periferals will automacally become mac os friendly.. always a good thing.

Patience... patience... step by little step

I hope so because I almost feel like setting my self on fire when I go to the game store and see the pc games section wich is practicly the whole store then I ask for the mac section and they say "ummm let me ask my manager....  oh it is over here"  Then they push aside a few cobwebs and I see shit games like indiana jones or tomb rader.  It makes me cry.*tear*

I dunno i know how u feel but i don't think its that bad. The games do come and some of them are awsome. What really gripes me is the shit code that portiing houses have do deal with, and becasue of the lack of funds they don't have enough to do decent enough Ports... QIII was developed for windows, Mac OS, and linux... and it ran on mac's beautifully.
However most games are just ported to the mac now and house's have to deal with shitty networking code and the crap that people call DirectX and its API's... horrible. If only porting house's had the time and ability to port these games to run on mac's as they should then things would be a lot more healthy - people would think more about Mac's as gaming machines and u might see some more healthy pings..

I heard rumours a while back about a software company which was in the process of developing an amazing app that could amazingly Port DirectX code increadably efficently and quickly.. dunno what happend to it though :(

I agree but i don't think it should just be up to the porting houses to re make a game I think the companies if they make a game for pc then they should make the same for mac.  I don't know if it is too much to ask for but that is how it shoud be in an ideal gaming world.  The companies can and should take the time to make their games cross compadtible I mean look at Blizzard they rock.  They only have a few games but those cames have the best multiplayer system out there and are pc/mac compatible without having to buy them in seperate boxes.  Other companies should take and follow Blizzard's example.  And I know that the other bigger better gaming companies have enough time and money to do exactly if not better than what Blizzard did.