Sync system unveiling: Wonder if Maza will get
01-06-2007, 05:34 PM
#1
Custom User Title:
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Mondaflore, Ikinburlistan
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Sync system unveiling: Wonder if Maza will get
Ford is unveiling a Microsoft system tomorrow (Jan. 7) that lets you plug MP3 players, Bluetooth phones and PDAs into the in-dash system. The article below says it will eventually be available in Lincolns and Mercurys. No word about Mazdas.
DETROIT — The Ford Motor Company and Microsoft are expected to roll out new technology dubbed "Sync" next week that will beef up wireless in-vehicle functions, including the ability to receive e-mail, download music and connect with MP3 devices.
The announcement will be made at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas and at the North American International Auto Show. A report in The Wall Street Journal says the system will make its debut next year as an option on the Ford Focus and Five Hundred and will be offered on all Ford models in 2008. Sync will eventually be expanded to the Lincoln and Mercury brands.
The announcement will be made at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas and at the North American International Auto Show. A report in The Wall Street Journal says the system will make its debut next year as an option on the Ford Focus and Five Hundred and will be offered on all Ford models in 2008. Sync will eventually be expanded to the Lincoln and Mercury brands.
01-07-2007, 01:41 PM
#3
Custom User Title:
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Mondaflore, Ikinburlistan
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by mysql101
last paragraph says they're going to include high def tv's in the dash in the future?
01-07-2007, 01:43 PM
#4
Originally Posted by No More Oldsmobiles
It says high-def screens. I don't think that necessarily means TV.
01-13-2007, 10:37 PM
#7
Gadgeteer and Driver
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Washington State, USA
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are some videos around, like this: http://www.autoblog.com/2007/01/08/v...crosofts-sync/
It's a sweet experience. I sure hope there's support for DRM'd content because I like subscription services (Napster, Zune) a lot! It's been more than an year since I had to buy a CD from an artist I like and I'm always up to date with latest releases.
A little rant here: what people sometime don't understand is that Microsoft and Apple don't "DRM" stuff. The content providers (labels, etc) do. Microsoft and Apple offer ways for them to protect those songs and support the playing back of this content, because that's the only way content providers will keep on providing content (no pun intended). But ultimately MS and Apple don't make money out of that. At least not as much as they spend developing the protection mechanisms, fighting the hackers, updating encriptions, receiving the blame in the PR game, etc. In an ideal scenario, they would love to not have to support DRM at all and save a lot of money. The consumers would love that too, because the labels always tend to turn the ***** on the DRM settings too high (3 times in 3 days for Zune, for instance) and make our life miserable. I guess the artists (some of those are also exploited by the labels) would not completely like the non-DRM world at first, but if there's another way of getting money out of the distribution of the songs, they would jump on that. (end of rant)
I saw some news about the Sync and they say they are expecting to go all FoCoMo by 2008. Does anyone know if this means Mazda, Volvo, Jaguar, etc?
It's a sweet experience. I sure hope there's support for DRM'd content because I like subscription services (Napster, Zune) a lot! It's been more than an year since I had to buy a CD from an artist I like and I'm always up to date with latest releases.
A little rant here: what people sometime don't understand is that Microsoft and Apple don't "DRM" stuff. The content providers (labels, etc) do. Microsoft and Apple offer ways for them to protect those songs and support the playing back of this content, because that's the only way content providers will keep on providing content (no pun intended). But ultimately MS and Apple don't make money out of that. At least not as much as they spend developing the protection mechanisms, fighting the hackers, updating encriptions, receiving the blame in the PR game, etc. In an ideal scenario, they would love to not have to support DRM at all and save a lot of money. The consumers would love that too, because the labels always tend to turn the ***** on the DRM settings too high (3 times in 3 days for Zune, for instance) and make our life miserable. I guess the artists (some of those are also exploited by the labels) would not completely like the non-DRM world at first, but if there's another way of getting money out of the distribution of the songs, they would jump on that. (end of rant)
I saw some news about the Sync and they say they are expecting to go all FoCoMo by 2008. Does anyone know if this means Mazda, Volvo, Jaguar, etc?
01-13-2007, 11:06 PM
#8
Stuck in a love triangle
Originally Posted by The Overman
It's a sweet experience. I sure hope there's support for DRM'd content because I like subscription services (Napster, Zune) a lot! It's been more than an year since I had to buy a CD from an artist I like and I'm always up to date with latest releases.
A little rant here: what people sometime don't understand is that Microsoft and Apple don't "DRM" stuff. The content providers (labels, etc) do. Microsoft and Apple offer ways for them to protect those songs and support the playing back of this content, because that's the only way content providers will keep on providing content (no pun intended). But ultimately MS and Apple don't make money out of that. At least not as much as they spend developing the protection mechanisms, fighting the hackers, updating encriptions, receiving the blame in the PR game, etc. In an ideal scenario, they would love to not have to support DRM at all and save a lot of money. The consumers would love that too, because the labels always tend to turn the ***** on the DRM settings too high (3 times in 3 days for Zune, for instance) and make our life miserable. I guess the artists (some of those are also exploited by the labels) would not completely like the non-DRM world at first, but if there's another way of getting money out of the distribution of the songs, they would jump on that. (end of rant)
01-16-2007, 01:44 AM
#9
Gadgeteer and Driver
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Washington State, USA
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, it's your choice 
(Btw, I'm taking that you are talking about not using Vista as a generalization of OSes that have support to DRM, which is the subject here. So it's a given you'd not be seen buying, installing or running Apple's OsX either, since Apple's iTunes is the mother of all DRM'd content.
)
In the end, it's all about choice. If you don't want to ever listen to a single DRM'd song your whole life, you can do that on Vista or on any other OS. Ultimately, you are the one choosing what to listen to and where to get that from.
If you decide to become a pirate and download everything from bittorrent or whatever they use nowadays, Vista or OSX won't prevent you from doing so and you won't have the cops on your door, unless your ISP screws with you (and it would happen no matter what OS you use). That doesn't change the fact that what you are doing is still wrong and illegal by current rules.
However, if you want to make a point, legally embracing a cause for the removal of DRM forever, managing to force all content providers and artists to give away their creations for free or find another way to monetize on that, go ahead! I and all customers will fully support you! We may even put up a statue for you somewhere
Subscription is arguably the only case I see DRM actually adding benefits for customers on existing, non-utopic, still bound by rules, reality. It's creating a way of distributing songs that wouldn't exist without DRM.
It's a clear trade-off though: you don't own the content. You rent it. However, you don't pay nearly as close as you'd if you bought it. It's a "cached" satellite radio. You stop paying, you cannot listen anymore.
But it offers some benefits for your monthly payment:
- I have no need to backup my collection. If I get a new computer, it's a matter of downloading again the songs I decided I like. If my computer explodes, I didn't lose anything either.
- It has a really well sorted web site, with tons of information on artists and songs and allows me to try out whatever I want without having to pay anything else.
- When I don't like the album, the delete key is really close by... I have no buyers remorse.
That's quite different from an iTunes DRM, for instance, in which you pay as much as you would for the content in CD and you are more restricted than if you ripped that yourself. That doesn't add anything to the user, just to the content providers. That's the kind of DRM that pisses people off!
Despite your sarcastic face above, I stand by what I said. I don't buy CD's anymore and I'd dread having to go back to buy one plastic disc for 15 bucks, go through the work of ripping it to my PC to get it in digital format, just to realize I really didn't like the album that much (which, for me, would happen even for the best albuns after a couple of months).
To finalize, an example: from the time I posted my last entry to now I have downloaded 3 other albuns that I was curious about ("Soundtrack of Freedom Writers", "Corinne Bailey Rae" and "The Strokes"), which took me a whole 5 mins and cost me nothing more. I sync'd it to my Zune and listened on my way to work on my car (unfortunately, using a s**tty FM transmitter, which is the missing link and the original point of the thread).
I would be 45 bucks poorer by now if I didn't have the subscription.
Why shouldn't I love this experience? (except for the fm... S**tty transmitter)
(Btw, I'm taking that you are talking about not using Vista as a generalization of OSes that have support to DRM, which is the subject here. So it's a given you'd not be seen buying, installing or running Apple's OsX either, since Apple's iTunes is the mother of all DRM'd content.
)In the end, it's all about choice. If you don't want to ever listen to a single DRM'd song your whole life, you can do that on Vista or on any other OS. Ultimately, you are the one choosing what to listen to and where to get that from.
If you decide to become a pirate and download everything from bittorrent or whatever they use nowadays, Vista or OSX won't prevent you from doing so and you won't have the cops on your door, unless your ISP screws with you (and it would happen no matter what OS you use). That doesn't change the fact that what you are doing is still wrong and illegal by current rules.
However, if you want to make a point, legally embracing a cause for the removal of DRM forever, managing to force all content providers and artists to give away their creations for free or find another way to monetize on that, go ahead! I and all customers will fully support you! We may even put up a statue for you somewhere
Subscription is arguably the only case I see DRM actually adding benefits for customers on existing, non-utopic, still bound by rules, reality. It's creating a way of distributing songs that wouldn't exist without DRM.
It's a clear trade-off though: you don't own the content. You rent it. However, you don't pay nearly as close as you'd if you bought it. It's a "cached" satellite radio. You stop paying, you cannot listen anymore.
But it offers some benefits for your monthly payment:
- I have no need to backup my collection. If I get a new computer, it's a matter of downloading again the songs I decided I like. If my computer explodes, I didn't lose anything either.
- It has a really well sorted web site, with tons of information on artists and songs and allows me to try out whatever I want without having to pay anything else.
- When I don't like the album, the delete key is really close by... I have no buyers remorse.
That's quite different from an iTunes DRM, for instance, in which you pay as much as you would for the content in CD and you are more restricted than if you ripped that yourself. That doesn't add anything to the user, just to the content providers. That's the kind of DRM that pisses people off!
Despite your sarcastic face above, I stand by what I said. I don't buy CD's anymore and I'd dread having to go back to buy one plastic disc for 15 bucks, go through the work of ripping it to my PC to get it in digital format, just to realize I really didn't like the album that much (which, for me, would happen even for the best albuns after a couple of months).
To finalize, an example: from the time I posted my last entry to now I have downloaded 3 other albuns that I was curious about ("Soundtrack of Freedom Writers", "Corinne Bailey Rae" and "The Strokes"), which took me a whole 5 mins and cost me nothing more. I sync'd it to my Zune and listened on my way to work on my car (unfortunately, using a s**tty FM transmitter, which is the missing link and the original point of the thread).
I would be 45 bucks poorer by now if I didn't have the subscription.
Why shouldn't I love this experience? (except for the fm... S**tty transmitter)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Shankapotamus3
Series I Trouble Shooting
28
03-14-2021 03:53 PM
arexatemate
RX-8 Parts For Sale/Wanted
6
10-28-2019 08:16 AM
