You got voted down because anyone who has migrated iTunes knows that even Apple's prescribed procedure screws your shit up. You can't even easily retain play counts and star ratings without a ridiculous process.

Media Monkey however works exactly the same every time I've installed it...and even allows me to transfer my cache so I don't have to rebuild it. Fancy that!

I didn't say that universally giving more choices to users increases your user base as that would be a stupid strategy (or not a strategy at all). I'm saying that adding support for things just because they're "better" doesn't mean it extends your user base. Giving choices to people based on what they're most likely to encounter is a much better strategy. That's why Real Player support is still out there for example. We're actually both stating the same idea, just differently...and perhaps I'm not saying as well as you which is likely.

Nope. Not a single one exists in that context except the one I mentioned per that context. But nice try.

In comparison to what? I'd like to see a metric for how you qualify "impacting users the least."

I misguidedly adopted iTunes many years ago and continue to be bitten in the ass over it again and again. How many times have you had to migrate your iTunes library to a new machine and then get it all working with your iPhone without losing any apps or media? How much of your media collection is embargoed because of Apple DRM? How much of your media metadata do you need to reapply after a fresh migration? I've had a new machine migration take 6 hours for all of my files and apps and then 10 hours of re-doing media tasks that iTunes screwed up. These are just a few of the well-known issues that pop up for any users of popular Apple devices and/or software

I agree that they're great at squeezing revenue from every possible source but claiming they do this while "impacting their users the least" makes no sense. Do you even use their products because you sound like you don't or are in denial of the realities of being a regular Apple customer.

PS - I'm also involved in a corporate relationship with them and the mealy-mouthed BS from their corporate staff about their non-existent "enterprise" services is even worse than consumer sales and support.

You are projecting your ideology onto others troll. If you actually thought about the issue from from a business perspective you'd realize that whether or not the technology is inferior is largely irrelevant to the issue at hand. It's about giving choices to users that better position you to capture as many more users as possible. If this was a job interview for a bizdev or related position you would have been shown the door in the first 5 mins.

If you think Jullian Assange stole all the glory from someone who's been locked up in solitary for 7 months you're just stupid. I don't usually do Ad Hominem but in this case it seemed warranted. How much money have you donated to Manning's defense fund? How many letters have you written to your congress-critter about it? Now do some research about what Jullian and Wikileaks have done for Manning and I'm sure you'll see that your comment, while well meaning, is just stupid.

Do you honestly think you know enough about how major newspapers/publishing orgs operate to claim that they don't use information as leverage against competitors, it's readers or even sources?

I think your comment shows you don't know the first thing.

I'll give you an example: "Snow expected this weekend, stay tuned after this commercial break to find out how much and how it will effect your weekend plans."

So the news network is willing to let you die in a snowy car crash just so that you'll watch the next set of ads. Assange defends himself from the threat of extra-legal assassination and he's an evil monster!

Welcome to the Kool-Aid you just drank.

Who are you people who keep repeating this crap? If you spent less time commenting and more time actually reading you might actually have something to say.

Here. I'll do the work for you.

From TFA: "Mr. Assange is no boon to American journalists. His activities have already doomed proposed federal shield-law legislation protecting journalists' use of confidential sources in the just-adjourned Congress. An indictment of him could be followed by the judicial articulation of far more speech-limiting legal principles than currently exist with respect to even the most responsible reporting about both diplomacy and defense. If he is not charged or is acquitted of whatever charges may be made, that may well lead to the adoption of new and dangerously restrictive legislation. In more than one way, Mr. Assange may yet have much to answer for."

I can understand that Abrams is disappointed that the shield law is being shelved but how is that Assange's fault? Why should Assange be held responsible for legislation that the US congress chooses to vote on or not? Once again a Wikileaks detractor shows that they have an axe to grind unrelated to Wikileaks or Assange. He's old and mad that he's not getting what he wants i.e. Stay off my lawn Julian!

Also...Ellsberg himself says that The Pentagon Papers and Wikileaks are two sides of the same coin. That sounds like a bit more of a credible source for comparisons of mission statement and motives. You know...the guy who actually had the motive.

That is really the point of all this isn't it. The attitude in the Wired article should tell you everything. It's a bunch of bluster that makes Wired look petty and guilty at the same time. That to me should be the most telling part. They're dodging. Big time.

One of my favorite aspects to Greenwalds recent high-profile writings is that the targets of his questions keep shooting themselves in the foot with their responses. Michael Lind did this last week and I'm sure anyone who cares enough time to read through it all will find that Wired went straight down Lind's already face-palming path.

It's really a wonder to behold.

Consitutional lawyers have a way of being trolls against those who violate the constitution's tenants. That's kind of their job. You get a cookie.

I would just like to point out to those who reference Stuart Smalley when talking Franken (not you specifically tophermeyer). Smalley was a PARDOY of new-agey talk show host that was the life-coach of that time. He was making fun of those kinds of people and yet I constantly catch people referencing SS as if he was a real person or a character that Al took seriously as a healer or something. It's like people who don't get that Stephen Colbert is a parody character.

Now if you don't think the Stuart character is funny that's your opinion. I for one don't like SS but have always liked Franken's standup.

Comedy is one of the hardest industries to break into in any meaningful way period. Call up ANY comedian and ask them (assuming they make enough money to pay for some kind of phone service.)

Now why don't you tell us what you do for a living so that I can write two sentences that dismiss your life's work with ignorant generalizations.

I've never followed a posters comments on his own story until today because you're so obviously the biggest troll ever. Your statements contradict each other and no matter what a sensible commenter does to refute your points you keep up your inane refrain of bias and Democrat love and the claim nobody's refuting your points.

Google was not only threatened with an inquiry, an inquiry was actually made! Imagine that! Said inquiry said there isn't evidence of theft or wrongdoing so no charges are made. It's easy to imagine that charges were dropped as the information they collected was publicly broadcast over unsecured networks. It's a much more plausible explanation than conspiracy but I assume you will continue to project your bias issues on everyone else.

Jesus you're dense. A preference for one entity's actions over another is not bias you twit. You sound like a petulant child.