|
|
|
|
|
by gilgoomesh
3520 days ago
|
|
Apple would say that syncing through iTunes is easier than interacting with a filesystem. As a concept, this leads into a debate about whether ideas like the Plan 9 operating system – where everything was a filesystem – are right or wrong. Clearly, some people love filesystem interfaces and would like to use that as a metaphor for all information systems. Apple's attitude with their iDevices has always been to use "appliance" interfaces to information systems and make filesystems an implementation detail. |
|
On the other hand, Apple doesn't want you to be able to easily share your media with others, nor copy it off the player; no doubt under the influence of the RIAA and other pro-copyright, pro-DRM groups.
While I think concepts like Plan 9 may be going a bit too far, I strongly believe that the filesystem as a place to organise all your persistent data is ideal because of its power and freedom; IMHO the trend away from the filesystem is nothing but a way to force users into proprietary systems and control their actions. The companies and media groups don't want things like P2P filesharing, whether over the network or even casually between friends using physical media (look up the term "copyparty".) They don't want users to have that freedom. Hence they are driving them away from the concept of "files" in general, essentially attempting to deprecate and push that out of the mind of users so that as an end-goal, they ultimately will not ever realise that sharing with or giving something to others could be, and was, at one time as easy as copy-paste.
I think I'm not the only one who saw the USB-sticks-turned-media-players and thought "that's just right", and abhorred Apple's proprietary overengineered solution; but in the end, it seems Apple's marketing won...