Joe, thanks for the response and your quite welcome. I agree with you
and fully appreciate the position you all are in. I don't blame you
guys if this is how the game is to be played and once folks know the
facts, I think anyone who is a member of RFBD and those considering
it should beat them up over it. I never had a problem with someone
making a buck, but to limit choice is not fair and is a disadvantage
for RFBD if in fact this is what happens. All speculation on my part,
but I think you understand what I'm saying.
Scott
On Apr 8, 2006, at 11:35 PM, Kafka's Daytime wrote:
Hi Scott,
First, many thanks re the katieplayer registration. Every bit helps.
I agree that katieplayer support should be as broad as possible.
We're happy to provide support for DRM when we're allowed to do so.
What's worrisome is when DRM is used in a way that excludes
developers. NLS, in it's publicly-posted business plan points to a
single vendor developing both DRM and playback solutions (1
hardware, 1 Windows software). I don't know what, if anything, has
changed since NLS published its business plan...but this is an
example of a situation where we would like to support but will not
be, at least initially, allowed (nor will any developers other than
the single developer chosen to implement both DRM and playback
solutions). I know some folks on the list have objected to my
version of the facts...but it really is right there in the business
plan.
For developers, like us, there are costs to implement DRM (one
wants to avoid implementing multiple proprietary schemes -
especially if they're being changed every couple of years) and
there can be (for us there have been) very significant yearly costs
(read thousands of dollars) associated with gaining and keeping
access to a DRM scheme at all (particularly if you need to develop
the DRM implementation for your platform-of-choice from scratch. We
had to do that. On the Windows side, a third party solution was
simply plugged in. No development from scratch). For katieplayer,
we have absorbed those costs and not passed those costs on to our
customers because we're staying true to the goal of affordability
that inspired the effort in the first place. If a DRM scheme is
fair, open and reasonable we will support it. We can't be expected
to do more than that, of course. The sustainability of the effort
is at stake and we'd be irresponsible to do otherwise...know what I
mean?
As long as RFBD, Bookshare and others allow katieplayer to support
their content we can and will do so happily. The Bookshare model is
easiest since it does not require DRM to be built into the player
(and still satisfies legal requirements for protecting copyrighted
content). Today's feedback indicates, unsurprisingly, that folks
want support to be as broad as possible - and they don't want to
have to use multiple pieces of software to access multiple formats
or content from different providers. That's the information we need
to inform our efforts as we move forward (and, if we have our
druthers, is right in line with the all-in-one solution we'd like
to ultimately provide). For now, look for both RFBD and Bookshare
(DAISY 2 and DAISY 3) support with an eye towards this happening in
a single app. If other vendors allow fair access to their DRM
implementations we'll happily support their content too.
Joe
On Apr 8, 2006, at 10:42 PM, Scott Howell wrote:
Joe, even though I probably wouldn't have a need to run it on
another machine, I think I'll go ahead and register another copy
to not only suport the excellent work, but I have my wife's IMac
as a backup if mine were to fail. Now as far as supporting what. I
think in the ideal world it would be nice to support all of it,
RFBD, NLS, and Book Share. I certianly think this would be wise as
there are students who would want to use Katieplayer to play those
RFBD books, there isn't another Daisy player for the Mac I'm aware
of, and it would make Katieplayer a solution for all.
Is there a particular reason why you all wouldn't want to support
DRM? I understand if there were some expensive licensing fees on
your end, but at least my understanding with RFBD is that you can
get the key for some very small fee and your registering like you
do with Book SHare so I think that would cover those fees. I don't
know, but maybe you could explain further.
Also as far as supporting text-only vs recorded voice, I think
that would not be the best route either. I think the more that can
be supported, the better, but I'm not a developer so don't know if
this is more work per say or what. I agree the smaller files etc.
but I think limiting the player to only text-only files as Daisy,
not sure this would be wise. Just my thoughts.
tnx
Scott
On Apr 8, 2006, at 1:56 PM, Kafka's Daytime wrote:
Hi Scott,
There was a bit of discussion about this on the list a few weeks
ago. We still have to complete testing of katieplayer on Intel
Macs before we make any changes required and issue a public
statement about katieplayer running on the Intel Macs. We require
a license (BASIC: $18) for each machine on which katieplayer is
installed. If it is a replacement machine (and you won't be using
katieplayer on two separate machines) please send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] including your new Hardware Fingerprint.
Again, we expect to have compatibility/update news in the
reasonably near future. I'll be sure to post the new information
to the list. Sorry for any delay/inconvenience. We'll get there.
Also keep in mind the Cocoa version of katieplayer is under
development in parallel.
Incidentally, I have a question for all on the list - or at least
those interested in DAISY. - regarding the forthcoming Cocoa
version of katieplayer. How would you feel if the new Cocoa
version of katieplayer were to support only Bookshare/DAISY 3
books and DAISY 2 content which does not use "live" Digital
Rights Management (DRM) (unless the standard is not obscure and
is available to any developer without draconian licensing fees/
requirements)? RFBD books, for instance, would - under this
scenario - *not* be supported (though we'd probably keep the
legacy version of katieplayer available). We're also considering
moving away from the 'text + audio' flavor of books and
concentrating solely on 'text-only' (e.g. those books provided by
Bookshare). My own humble personal view is that it seems less and
less wise to distribute audio with a talking book. There is the
advantage of the human reader - but the prompt availability and
small file sizes of the 'text-only' books (rendered 'live' by
synthesized speech) - seems to me to trump the advantages one has
in the human-read audio. Further, Bookshare's content collection
is getting bigger and broader and I think we're going to see it
continue to grow (recent addition of the O'Reilly technical
series was very nice and kind of a big deal). (RFBD offers a fine
service - I'm simply wondering about the best way for us to
proceed with katieplayer based on the needs/wants of our
audience). BTW, the katieplayer Cocoa version would come in at
the same $18 price point for the BASIC version i.e. affordability
is still a basic goal of the effort. Finally, think of
katieplayer in a broader, accessible media player sense. No
promises, but what would be in your feature wish list? Again,
would love to hear some thoughts from those who are interested.
Thanks in advance,
Joe
On Apr 8, 2006, at 12:04 PM, Scott Howell wrote:
Joe, just got myself an Intel-based Mac. I used disk target mode
to move all my stuff to the new Mac. I didn't expect everything
to go perfectly and well Katieplayer isn't working any longer.
That would make sense do to the different hardware fingerprint.
I tried just running the app and putting the key, but that
didn't work. Matter of fact, if I switch to another app while
its in the registration dialog and then switch back, I loose
speech from Katieplayer and can't navigate around. So, I wanted
to pass that along, but also how do I register Katieplayer to
work on my new Mac.
tnx
Scott
