Ratoc's REX-EX30S external SATA Express Card 34 is listed by Ractoc's Systems on a page with MAC compatible devices
http://www.ratocsystems.com/products/feature/mac_esata.html
Also on the following page http://www.ratocsystems.com/services/driver/sata.html there are downloadable MAC OS X software drivers for the REX-EX30S and other Ractoc products.

Disclaimer: I am a Norwegian who does not live in Norway, and I like Apple computers and even Apple iPods.

However my point is that it is OK to be a Norwegian, while still disagreeing with the Norwegian Ombudsman, and also it is OK to be a fan of Apple Computer including their iPods, while still disagreeing with their iTunes business and the sale of compressed music with DRM attached.

The most interesting points of the Norwegian Ombudsman's complaint against iTunes is:

(1) Whether Apple can use DRM to limit their Itunes Music Files to be played on only their iPods:

It is important to understand that attaching a DRM to downloadable music is a requirement coming from trhe Record Companies and Music Industry, and not from Apple or any other seller of downloadable music. Attaching a DRM was a prerequisite for getting permission to resell the music in the first place.

Why do you think the Record Companies are so silent and absent from this debate? It sounds like it is a fight between governments and Apple computer, while the real issue is that Record Companies are more trhan interested in selling the same music over and over again on different media, and also with diffferent DRMs attached to it.

It is also interesting to notice that usually also computer software and game software are limited to only be useable on one type of compatible machines. If you want another version of the same software (if availlable) for another type of machine, you need to make another purchase for the other machine. It is also worth noticing that Apple's agreement with the record companiesand/or owners of the rights to the music is based on the fact that the music should be confined to use on only this one type of player. Also in this connection it is worth noticing that it is in the record companies' interest that the same music (same artist, same song) is sold as many times as possible on as many media as possible so it creates the greatest total revenue to the record companies.

As seen from Apple's (and the record companies') point of view, removing the DRM (or making it playable on any MP3 etc player, it would violate the original agreement, and the entire business model would collapse. So the Norwegian legal attempt could make a domino effect of destroying the entire business model of downloadable music, not only concerning Apple, but any other such reseller off music on the internet..

On the other hand, the Norwegian Ombudsman's attempt to protect the consumer against iTunes would be much better served by announcing to the same consumer that the same music is availlable in uncompressed form (1411kbps vs 128kbps) without any restricting DRM at roughly the same price if you buy the CD versus buying the compressed files with DRM from iTunes. Who in their right mind is wasting their money on this. The answer is: The same consumer who the Ombudsman is trying to protect. Moral: The Consumer obviously needs protection against his own stupidity.

(2) The restriction of consumers right to compensation.

If the Norwegian Ombudsman gets through with his demand that the software supplier (in this case a music file) is to be responsible for the hardware if damaged by a virus who presumeably got through a security hole in the software, we will see a gigantic can of worms open up making every computer software manufacturer responsible for any possible hardware damage caused either directly or indirectly by the software itself (the legal system would get very busy and tied down if this was made into law). This works against common practise in the entire software industry, and I suspect it would seriously reduce the amount of availlable software and slow down to the extreme any development of new software.

I seriously do not think the Norwegian ombudsman understand the implications of his demand, especially if this became the worldwide norm.

(3) Application of cooling off period to electronic sales of music and other software.

This is an extremely shortsighted and ignorant demand from the Ombudsman, since obviously returning a (by that time copied) music and/or other software to the seller for a monetary refund would make it entirly unintersting for any electronic reseller of music and/or other software to operate at all.

Maybe Norway will become the first entirely commercially software free country in the world!

*************

This much said; I agree with many other commments herin (Digg.com) that the inteligent consumer should be more than capable of buying music in a form that has no DRM attached and also is not compressed (like various downloadable music files, not only iTunes). It is simply STUPID to buy them when the same music is availlable on CD (and also sometimes LP and other formats) for pretty much the same money.

And I remind you that iPods from Apple (that I personally like, and have bought several) can very well be used for playing uncompressed music files ripped from my own (and paid for) CD's. I do not have a single DRM file on any of my iPods, and they sound a hell of a lot better than any compressed iTunes file with DRM (I have tried other friend's players with such files).

Cheers!

Yesterday March 14, 2006 the Japanese ministry in charge of the PSE law and its interpretation announced that "Vintage Electric Equipment" including guitar amps, audio, electric musical instruments, and electric powered photographic equipment etc. will be exempted from full PSE testing requirements, and will be allowed to sell after a simplified registration procedure is followed by the merchant.

For those who can read Japanese, see news item at Yahoo Japan:
http://dailynews.yahoo.co.jp/fc/domestic/pse_law/
http://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20060314-00000053-mai-bus_all

Also notice that major second-hand audio retailer HiFi Do had already registered with the ministry as a re-manufacturer of used audio equipment and has set itself up to do fully compliant testing and certification, and also will equip each piece of used equipment they sell (after testing and modifying the equipment to comply with the law) with a properly registered PSE sticker.

See http://www.hifido.co.jp/merumaga/osu_sale/060310/

So this means the good Ryuichi Sakamoto (who campaigned against the law prohibiting sale of vintage synthesizers etc.) and his friends were successful.

Cheers!