dburney

This appears to work in iTunes on any Mac. I have my browser window in focus now and the bottom of my collapsed iTunes window just visible under the browser window. If I move my cursor to the volume slider and use the scroll wheel on my trackball it moves the volume up and down.

ooooh…burn!

Gimme, gimme, gimme! I would be the perfect random selection.

Please make this work with my PS3 - I'm already sharing all my media from my Mac to my PS3, this would be the icing on the cake. I don't mind if it isn't HD - 420p would be fine for streaming. I would still get most of movies on Blu-Ray from Netflix, but I could stream documentaries and other stuff that I wouldn't necessarily have to watch in HD.

Agreed - I use Google Reader now as well. Adding the OS X Style from Hicks Design (http://userstyles.org/styles/2318) really makes a difference. I don't know if I'll ever go back to a desktop reader.

Am I missing something? EyeConnect and Twonkyvision basically set up a UPnP media server, ie, providing access to your media content by making it visible on your network for the PS3. Codec and file support are the burden of the PS3 - that's why the recent firmware update made all of my .avi files work.

So what does MediaLink do differently? Why is codec support suddenly the host software's responsibility - shouldn't it just be providing a way to make the media accessible via the PS3?

Just curious - I'll give it a whirl.

Perhaps the issue with those of you receiving audio errors is the fact that this doesn't yet support any .mp4 of any type (otherwise known as ACC files).

I tried EyeConnect as well - if you customize the location of your media it works like a charm - I have my iTunes library and movies, etc., on an external NAS plugged into my router and before the trial was up I had access to all of my media.

I'll give this a try, but no AAC support is a bit of a concern - what is it doing that requires the software to support a specific codec? All Eyeconnect does is make my files visible on my network to my PS3 via UPnP - whether the media plays or not is up to the PS3.

Oh well, I'll give it a whirl.

Mkay here's how it works in the business world. Creatives are paid for distribution, ie., the usage if you will. When we use an illustrator for an ad, he's paid handsomely based on the circulation, the number of ads and the life expectancy of the campaign, if the illustration will be used elsewhere and for other collateral pieces we typically pay a whole lot of money and just buy the rights in whole to the illustration. Unless all rights are transferred the content is still legally the property of the creator - not the user. For the price to be fair all future uses are basically guestimated and a price is agreed upon. The same thing goes for the writers - they're paid for their ideas to be used on the shows, the original premise of distribution of which has traditionally been television/cable and DVD. Now with digital distribution on the rise the creatives deserve a slice of the pie. An ample % of digital distribution income should be negotiated into the writers contracts - if the studios make more money, so should the creatives responsible for the content that is driving up those revenues. This has nothing to do with "they don't do any extra work, they already got paid" - it has to do with getting their fair share of profits made from their ideas. Look at it like this - if you took a photo and sold it to the newspaper without any consent to distribution, wouldn't you be pissed if they started selling it on post cards and posters, ie., making a profit. Wouldn't it be better if you were paid more for giving them the right to not only use the pic in the paper but also for other pieces such as books, magazines, posters, postcards, etc. - and maybe you'd get a % of those sales? It's not a whole lot unlike royalties to a musician based on album sales. They're reimbursed for volume of content, writers deserve the same (as do photographers, illustrators, etc.).

Up until I read this, I thought maybe there was a postal worker somewhere who snagged my demo. I received all the e-mails, etc., just like everyone else and I have yet to see my demo. I was pretty anxious last week, made sure my PSP was charged, cleaned the screen and this first thing I did everyday upon getting home from work was check the mail, but nada. I've all but given up at this point.

There are two main differences here. MP3 vs. AAC and a variable pricing structure. Honestly, while I don't condone the DRM, it has never caused me any problems.

The MP3 vs AAC is almost a non-issue as well, since hardcore audiophiles will likely buy the CD. While MP3 is touted as being compatible with more players - AAC provides higher quality compression at a lower bit rate.

I think the variable pricing structure is the key and the per song pricing between 89¢ and 99¢ is exactly why labels like Universal have jumped the Apple ship. Apple wants to keep everything the same price as much as possible. Some albums are a bit more, but the average price is $9.99 and singles are always 99¢ - Amazon on the other hand has no problems handling a variety of pricing structures. This is what the labels have wanted and this is what Amazon has delivered. While it may be of slightly less quality (MP3 vs AAC) it is DRM free (in exchange I'm sure for the pricing flexibility) and they can tout the "plays on any mp3 player - bla bla," as a feature.

Even this morning on the radio I heard a report about the leading iTunes music store from Apple that only allows its downloads to "play on an iPod" - this misinformation is everywhere and Amazon will pickup many, many customers as a result.

Maybe now is a good time for Apple to re-consider it's pricing structure for the iTMS. Otherwise I think they'll be losing a bit of market share. Not that the competition is bad, I'm just afraid that Apple may be too stubborn sometimes for its own good.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I'll be checking out the Amazon store this evening.