Microsoft is NOT working on a copyright check for Zune

We're supposed to trust MS? Based on what? Hey Paul, I'd like to know your opinion on Ballmers tenure. Is it similar to this one: http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/archives/138368.asp?source=rss

@johnpapilloma Again with the childish name calling. Give me a break.

“We have agreed to work with NBC across a range of topics, and protection of copyrighted material is certainly one of them.” nowhere does this quote suggest filtering protection, which is what your entire argument is all about. if anything, it only conveys that they will utilize already existing DRM technologies. quit thinking out your arse, losta.

"Mr. Perrette told me that Microsoft committed to explore filtering" Seems pretty clear to me, Waethorn. Wanna take bets, though?

"Immature and childish blog posts for Dummies" By Windows/Microsoft Apologist Susie Waethorn Maybe Oprah will pick it up for her book club. Could make some serious $$$ if she endorses you.

"Immature and childish blog posts for Dummies" Pot to kettle: "Wha'chu talkin' bout, Willis?" "Maybe Oprah will pick it up for her book club." Oprah has a book club??!? DEAR. GOD. Is there no market she won't eat into?? "While Steve Jobs was coming out against DRM, Steve Ballmer was touting it as a great product." Sorry you lose that argument - case in point: AmazonMP3. Again, I redirect to your "boardroom" rant.... "Microsoft has a long history of paper releases and paper promises in order to hold clients and convince them away from the competition." Exhibit a: "300+ new features" Exhibit b: "secret features" Exhibit c: iPhone "SDK" 1.0 aka Safari Exhibit d: Turning a formerly open-source platform into the most closed platform on the market. I could go on.... ....oh, you were talking about Microsoft? "But you are correct that they have not promised that this will ever happen in any on-the-record kind of way." Thank you. I accept your apology.

"Sorry you lose that argument - case in point:  AmazonMP3." What does that even mean? Yes, Amazon has been given more DRM-free music from the labels because they're trying to weaken Apple. That's known by all. My point was simply that Apple and Jobs have been vocal against DRM-music from the beginning and became successful by having the most uniform and least restrictive DRM on the market. Every song in iTunes would be DRM free if Apple could get the labels provide them. Microsoft, on the other hand, aggressively developed and marketed WMP DRM before having a successful store or player from them or a third party (they still don't). The iPod came out with no DRM remember. Microsoft's DRM came out with no player. It's a simple point. Microsoft was targeting the labels and could care less about the consumer. Apple was targeting the consumer and the user and pushing back on the labels. The labels don't like that. Hence Amazon MP3 gets some preferential treatment, not that it seems to be having any effect on iTunes. "Exhibit a:  "300+ new features... secret features..." - um, that's not a paper release to freeze innovation. that's a list of features, many of which are small. So what? As for the "Secrets" there were plenty. The new finder, quick-look, and host of others. Were they mind-blowing? Of course not. Desktop OS's are mature products. But Quicklook itself is one of the best new OS features I've ever seen. If you can't see that, it means that you haven't used it enough. It's super-fast and awesome for productivity. "iPhone "SDK" 1.0 aka Safari" Actually... this is an example of the opposite of you point. But you're clearly not smart enough to understand that. You see, Apple promised nothing. They didn't claim to have an amazing SDK in the works and then never deliver, the way Microsoft did with WinFS. No. They said nothing about the SDK until they had a functioning beta that went out to developers immediately. Clearly that SDK has been in the work for a long time, but unlike Microsoft, Apple does everything it can to avoid empty promises. Thanks for the great example, though. "Turning a formerly open-source platform into the most closed platform on the market." How is OSX "the most closed platform on the market" exactly? Because it only runs on Apple hardware? Oh well. As for every other metric of an OS, OSX is more open than Windows. It's underpinnings are open source. It's web engine is fully open source (and in active use by Adobe in AIR, Nokia on their platform, and Google in Android). Their applications and OS all use open xml file formats. QuickTime is based on open MPEG4 (well, technically, MPEG4 was based on QuickTime) and defaults codecs that can play anywhere. Oh, and OSX uses no activation or OS DRM. Plus, they sell a 5-license family pack for less than one license of Vista Ultimate (more like Ultimate rip-off). Microsoft is by FAR the more proprietary software company. This is just so plainly obvious to anyone with a brain and the time to use it. I'll concede that OSX running only on Apple hardware is more restrictive than Linux or Windows. But's that's it. And the market doesn't seem to mind. I'll just throw "pot meet kettle" in here in advance even though it's no more relevant than when you use this tired, childish cliche.

@tayme Glad to hear your views from the wonderful world of marx. Unfortunately for ivory tower utopia, any objective review of economic history reveals that socialism is a failure and totally incompatible with human nature and progress in the real world. Profit motive works. Capitalism delivers the incentives required for innovation. Competition delivers lower prices and superior goods. Central planning delivers mal-investment and starvation. Gates and Jobs have been leaders in a computing revolution that has delivered benefits to billions in an environment of innovation and freedom. Non-profit government "planning" has delivered inflation, stagnation and decay in every area they endeavor from healthcare, to air transportation to energy. Antiquated economic theories aside, neither Gates nor Jobs are motivated by money. They're both so wealthy that additional income is utterly irrelevant. Plus, Gates is the greatest philanthropist the world has ever known and Jobs has been taking a 1dollar salary since he came back (making his money from stock options which means he's being rewarded along with investors). As a matter of technology and business interest, the means by which these two great companies deliver their products is where the conversation gets interesting. This is the playground Waethorn and I are sloppily discussing. They aren't "all the same" just because they're all for-profit. They are very different organizations with very different missions, ethics and aesthetics. As for this drug dealer libel... again, get yourself educated. That is not constructive or even remotely reasonable. I don't think you are in a very good position to be telling anyone who "gets it".

@tayme, You demonized profit and equated Microsoft and Jobs with drug dealers. That's not the same thing as saying that Gates and Jobs have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. As for my rude jab at Waethorn, our silly little sparing extends beyond this thread and he has called me far worse in far less reasoned ways.

@tayme, Understood. The difference between someone like Waethorn and myself is that I'm willing to admit when I'm wrong, or have gone too far. I don't think Apple is perfect and I don't think that everything Microsoft makes is garbage. But I do prefer Apple's approach and their products for the most part. I admire Steve Job's vision, focus and guts. I admire his commitment to simplicity and quality execution. Gates, on the other hand, has always been committed to dominance first. It's very clear that Gates never cared about quality of the end product or the experience as much as Jobs. He had his strategy for dominance and that was paramount. I personally don't admire that. "Good Enough" is not admirable to me. Gates strategy worked for the PC. Jobs seems to have it right for consumer electronics, and phones. The mac is doing just fine, but will likely always be a niche relative to Windows. Call me a shill if you want. I don't think it's a fair assessment. I'm a huge fan, but an honest one. I don't think the same can be said on the other side of the fence with Waethorn, and I'm not going to speak for anyone else mac or windows.