Apple patents iNanny for iPods
iPods: soon to limit enjoyment of music, for your own safety. Nanny Apple knows best, children.
The patent covers a system to calculate a “maximum volume parameter” during “the playing back of the media by the media player” based on the volume the player was set to while “playing back of audio media during a time period prior to executing the maximum volume refining step.”
For those who don’t speak Patentese, it’s a system to figure out how long you’ve been listening to music and at what volume before telling you to “turn that racket down” in the form of an automatically enforced drop in maximum volume. Don’t think that turning the iPod off and back on again will help you, either: the patent also covers a way to figure out “the amount of 'quiet time' between when the iPod is turned off and when it is restarted”, and if that doesn’t fit in with Apple’s idea of a decently long break you’ll still be stuck in ‘whisper’ mode.
It seems that Apple thinks that iPod owners are too dumb to set a sensible volume level. After an initial raft of lawsuits in the litigation-hungry United States Apple introduced the ability to set a user-configurable maximum volume limit on your iPod. Apple had protected themselves against lawsuits with the “but we gave you an option” defence, and users everywhere just ignored the ‘feature’. Everyone was happy.
If this patent were granted it’s quite likely that it would become a mandatory feature of the ubiquitous player, at least in the US. Personally, I prefer my MP3 player to be a little more rock ‘n roll and a little less preachy.
Should we think of the children, or should big business keep its nose out of your Spinal Tap-esque habits of turning it up to 11? Let us know via the forums.
Previous Article
20 Comments
Discuss in the forums Replyhatedespise iPod's. On the odd occasion I'm roaming around outside, I like to have my mp3 player constantly at full volume with the volume controls being half way along my headphone cord, and usually have the headphones around my neck. the few times that I do put my headphones over my ears is when someone starts trying to strike up a conversation when I don't want to talk (which is most of the time when I'm busy), or when biking a short distance (can't drive - need to get my eyes fixed).So what about those who connect their iPods to the 'aux-in of their car radio? Or those who connect their iPods to their home entertainment systems through a mixer where the device-output-volume should preferably be as loud as possible without clipping?
A short-sighted idea that will annoy people more than help them, I feel.
And yet, while I disagree with this as an enforced 'feature', the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of people simply do listen to their iPods (or other audio devices) at ridiculous volumes, heedless of the damage they're doing to their own ears or the annoyance they cause to others in their vicinity.
This, coupled with using crappy, tinny in-ear headphones such as those bundled with the iPod and which deliver ridiculous amounts of useless, high-energy, high-frequency content to the ears during normal use lead me to believe that the incidences of middle-age deafness and other hearing problems are bound to soar within the next decade if not sooner.
I don't like the idea of an enforced system such as this, but then again, people have proven time and again that they're stupid and ignorant when it comes to matters of long-term health.
Smoking, alcohol-abuse, drugs, over-eating... music-abuse?
VLC has had that for ages.
</nanny-stateism>
- H.
Where did you get that from? It seems reasonably that Apple (being as they are in the audio game) might be working on this kind of system, and it therefore seems reasonable that they would patent it. It is a somewhat large leap of logic to assume that it will definitely feature on future iPods, and a bigger leap to assume that you won't be able to turn it off. I'm not going to call for Jobs' head at least until this is actually 'enforced'.
Besides, since I only listen to my music for short periods of time anyway, I very much doubt whether this would affect me.
It's interesting to note that in patent-speak, they call it "the iPod" which is A Good Thing. I'm sick of hearing about 'iPod' as if he's a person.
Freakin A, No joke!
I hate this hyper paranoid, bunch or conniving *******s!
What happened to logic and ethic? :(
I agree, and I have to say that's possibly the worst article I've read on here.
But I think Apple should invest in developing a decent earphone that sends the music inwards instead of outwards... Freaking hate it when I'm forced to listen to the newest junk music on the bus because someone who thinks he's cool sits 10 rows behind me...
Loads of products already have AVL systems, notably most sony portables. Generally you can turn it off if you really want to go deaf when you're older. Plus iPods already have a 'MVL' system, whereby you can set a maximum volume lower than the ultimate maximum. This isn't all that different to that, except someone at the factory will be deciding instead of you.
It's not media players that bother me, its phones... why do people insist on playing "Chav FM" at full volume on theit mobiles wherever they are??? The real need is to ban external speaker routing of music on phones!!! [/rant]
Oh God yes.
You may be surprised at the number of patents Apple (among other companies) hold and do not currently use for one reason or another.
I never said this technology wouldn't ever be used, but the article is using pure speculation to attack Apple. I'm not entirely sure what the article is supposed to achieve.
Where is it attacking Apple? Because it states:
? Well, I 100% agree to this... iPhones and iPods aren't your property IMHO, you can only use them trough ways Apple wants.
Or maybe this?
It clearly is formulated as a conclusion the author makes, and tells more about the US legal system then Apple...
A little off topic: I do agree that the band wagon people who jump onto the iPod float are quite dumb... IMHO iPods are plain ugly, overpriced and totally not userfriendly...
But please, point me out to the grusome attacks towards Apple that are unfounded in your eyes...
I rest my case...