Someone in the mainstream world has had the courage to say something that needed to be said: Apple's approach to digital media is not only very consumer friendly, the Wintel hegemony's approach is not. Dan Gillmor of the San Jose Mercury News has fired a shot across the bow of the entertainment industry, Intel/AMD, and Microsoft, and I personally hope it is a shot heard loud and clear. Mr. Gillmor charges that while the Wintel companies are busily building Digital Rights Management controls into their respective chips and software, Apple is building its machines in a way that leaves consumers free to use their digital media as they see fit.

If you are not concerned about this area, you should be, and quick. The media companies are working overtime to control the way you use every song, every movie, and every electronic book, whether or not you legally own it. They want to control when you use it, where you use it, how use it, and if possible, make you pay for each and every time you do so. The cover is the threat of piracy, but what's truly at stake is that absolute control over your content. Dan Gillmor, a syndicated technology columnist for the Mercury News, has a far broader reach than a Mac editor ever will, and his message is not only good for Apple and the Mac platform, it is also good for consumers everywhere.

I am not naive enough to think that Apple is on a one-company crusade against the evil media companies, but Apple's public statements jive well with my own thoughts. The company has said that it feels that people ought to be trusted to use their legally bought music where they want to. In other words, it is not Apple's job to police us, and it is not right to assume we are pirates before we even get the opportunity to use our digital media. That's an approach, however, that is directly contrary to groups like the RIAA and the MPAA, which says we are not to be trusted, and must have our rights dictated to us, and controlled by them. Which approach do you prefer?