I like it because it’s not only well thought out, but he taken all of his random verbal explanations from the last few years and put them all in one place. It’s definitely worth reading.

Sources say that iTunes representatives have been urging labels to rethink their participation in the Amazon promotion and that they have backed up those warnings by withdrawing marketing support for certain releases featured as Daily Deals

I hope Amazon fights back, and hard. I’ve grown to love their mp3 downloads, and now buy far more from there than iTunes. They tend to have more variety, generally better prices and I don’t have to pay sales tax.

As an example, today’s daily deal – Hospice by The Antlers – is $2.99 on Amazon and $9.99 (plus tax) on iTunes. Moving away from the daily deal because it really is a special price just for today, one of my favorite albums – The Midnight Organ Fight by Frightened Rabbit – is currently $5.00 on Amazon and $9.99 (plus tax) on iTunes.

My biggest worry about something like this happening is that it will drive up prices for consumers. We’ve already seen indications of that happening with electronic books and I would hate to see it happen with music as well. So much of the music today is already overpriced nonsense – raising prices will only make it harder for people to find the really good stuff.

Sure, you can do a google search and get the exact code to enter into the Terminal, but there’s a reason I use a Mac and not some obscure variant of Unix.

Today I stumbled across a great little utility for turning the hidden file view on and off. Where? Surprisingly, on the Apple site.

showHiddenFiles does exactly what Apple should have included in the first place. The only thing that could make it better would be if it was a checkbox in Finder.app, but I guess it’s too much to hope for for Apple to include it in the upcoming 10.6.3 release.

I just put it into my Applications > Utilities folder hoping that I’ll remember it’s there next time I need it.

• In the United Kingdom, O2 started giving them away to customers willing to sign a 24 month contract instead of the usual 18 months.
• In the United States, Apple has also started selling the iPhone in their retail stores without the regular AT&T contract. The catch is that the units are still locked to AT&T, although that can be easily fixed.

Both of the above examples further strengthen the belief that a new version of the iPhone is due very soon, making it difficult for any potential customer to make the decision – by now and upgrade the software when 3.0 is released, or wait until the next generation is released?

The catch?

The new phones will still be “locked” to AT&T and won’t work with any other cellular carrier unless they’re modified. AT&T will only activate them on the regular iPhone plans, which include a $30 monthly charge for data access.

Surely this exclusive agreement to only sell iPhones locked to the AT&T network must be hurting Apple in some respect? What about the punters who like the iPhone, but don’t need or want the data plans? What about the punters who simply don’t have coverage in their area?

I can personally see the benefits of using an all in one device like the iPhone, but not if it means paying $30 per month more than I am already just because of the model of phone I have.

I believe Apple would sell a lot more units if there was the option of a completely unlocked version that could be used on any cellular network. Mind you, that option may be available sooner rather than later.

If the combination of very firm rumors and Apple’s usual product cycle are to be believed, a new version of the phone is due this summer. Add to that the belief that AT&T’s comfortable and exclusive arrangement may be due to end in June, and the cynic in me says AT&T is rushing to offload existing stock before it becomes obsolete.

We’ll see.

Personally I don’t understand why anybody would want a music player that’s so small you could lose it among the lint in the bottom of your pocket, but that isn’t the reason it’s still in the news.

The gurus over at iLounge reported that Apple have included a proprietary chip in the unit that determines whether or not you are using Apple’s earphones to enjoy your music. It seems that regular earphones will allow you to listen, but if you want to actually control what you’re listening to, you’ll need the Apple headphones to do so.

In iLounge’s words, this

needlessly and seriously complicates controls by switching to a buttonless body, which cannot be controlled without Apple headphones or not-yet-manufactured third-party proprietary remote control solutions.

This will certainly slow down the flood of manufacturers making compatible accessories to a crawl – not only can apple choose whether or not to share the specifications with the various earphone manufacturers, they can also choose who in particular to share them with.

Forget the manufacturers – this is bad news for the punters. It means that they will be stuck with the supplied accessories until such a time that Apple has shared the necessary specifications and in turn, the manufacturers have been able to adjust their production lines accordingly.

Sorry folks, you’re stuck with the tell-tale white ones for now.