Apple’s CEO fields some tough questions about consumer choice and whether old rivalry gets in the way. At the Wall Street Journal’s D conference, technology columnist Walt Mossberg took Apple CEO Steve Jobs through a comprehensive grilling session. Part 1, Part 2, Part 3.
Jobs Says Apple Can Innovate Much More If It Controls the Technology
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
He dodged a few core questions. You could see, even from just the text, that the interviewer was getting frustrated with him. Most of his answers sounded like advertisements.
He totally avoided answering the question on the iPod’s ability to play other formats. Maybe the real reason is that MS won’t license it to Apple, maybe it’s Apple being snobby… It’s annoying when people do interviews and then are not up front. They’re just wasting everybody’s time.
I liked what Jobs said about the iPod though. I’d way rather see the iPod get cheaper and have better battery life than get more expensive, less battery life and have a colour display (what’s the point?) and be able to show movies (who wants to watch a movie on a tiny screen?).
I am happy enough to read that Apple is not going to be focused on audio players and continues to make personal computers. Jobs have changed and changed very much from ’80s.
Page 3 was the best. Come on Steve/IBM get the iMac G5 out!
I am happy enough to read that Apple is not going to be focused on audio players and continues to make personal computers. Jobs have changed and changed very much from ’80s.
“I’d way rather see the iPod get cheaper and have better battery life than get more expensive, less battery life and have a colour display (what’s the point?) and be able to show movies (who wants to watch a movie on a tiny screen?).”
I’d add smaller, lighter, refine the menu system/interface where possible (it’s already pretty well refined) to your cheaper and better battery life. Those would all be worth-while, but, you’re right, a color screen? Maybe it would have some cool factor, but it would be utterly worthless.
apple has 21% of unit sales in the mp3 market when you count all mp3 players.
they have 0% of the flash based market.
they have 70% of the market for hard drive based players and that is now steadily declining now that their competitors are coming after them hard in that segment.
they likewise only have about 40% of the legal download market for songs and that too is declining as the competition heats up.
what jobs wont talk about is:
not making their target sales for songs in the first year
not even giving away their target with the pepsi promotion
ibook logic board failures at super high rates
out of stock and no imacs to sell in key back to school season
no speed increase on the powermac towers in 14 months
still no 2.5ghz g5 that you can buy and put in your hands
powermac 2.5ghz macs still showing 4 to 6 weeks on apple store for availability
powermac sales not hitting their targets for two quarters running
xserves shipping late and extremely limited quantities
spindoctor indeed.
It always happens at Apple. Jobs comes in takes control, does wonderful things, and then things spin out of control. Jobs needs to go and let somebody else run the ship again…
AAC is an idustry standard. Yes you have to pay liscencing fees to Dolby (I’m pretty sure its Dolby), but you also have to liscence Windows Media Format and it isn’t an idustry standard. Why do so many devices play WMF and no AAC? Of course in a perfect world they would play ogg vorbis
They vastly overshot their original estimate for iTMS sales in the first year, and would have met that 100 Million number except…
Pepsi royally screwed up the iTunes Music Store promotion. It wasn’t advertised nearly enough, plus they sat on huge shipments of bottles that actually had winning caps.
As for hardware not shipping fast enough… it’s a good and a bad thing. Obviously it’s bad because it frustrates people. But, it also means that the demand is there. It’d be far worse if they could ship computers on time because demand was low.
I think companies at this point are afraid. They’re afraid that using anything other than WMA will make their product unpalatable, because they know they’re not Apple, and they don’t have another business to fall back on, nor do they have the marketing power to convince people there’s an advantage in another format.
I hate the taste of Pepsi but must have bought around fifty of them during the promo. Never got a single winner.
So Apple is trying to use this encrypted AAC file format to lock people into iTunes and iPod. If MS were to do something like this, people would be proclaiming that Bill Gates is The Great Satan. But when Apple does it, Mac apologists say their just doing good business.
IMHO, these DRM-enabled file formats have got to go, unless htey standardize on just one. Imagine walking into a music store and they told you that the CDs they sold only worked on their brand of CD players. How long would you put up with that? Or in the case of Apple trying to keep Real’s file formats off the iPod, what gives them the right? What if you were to buy a new Ford car and they put a clause in the contract that said you couldn’t drive on any street where there was a Chevy dealership ?
Anonymous (IP: —.hb.mvl.intelos.net);
Seriously, you’re on OSNews.com. Everyone here knows a heck of a lot about all the major players, do you think spreading FUD here is going to do anything other than tarnish your name? Oh that’s right…anonymous. Save it for your granny who doesn’t know better.
I don’t think anyone will bother to go through your list of “facts” *snicker* but a lesser known fact to you apparently is that a number of people have their Dual 2.5GHz G5’s, search it.
It tickles me, it really does.
Matt
Mossberg: It isn’t going to be very hard to put Kodak into the iPod.
Jobs: It’s not just Kodak; it’s the whole DRM scene. It is a lot of work.
Ahhhh. You want to talk about spin? You sound like a Kerry or Bush man saying what the other side didn’t mention.
It was an interview. He replied to most all the questions asked, your list contains a great many questions not asked. Attack the interviewer, and even then its iffy.
Imacs aren’t for education, educational purches from schools go for the Emacs or the ibooks, and students go for the ibooks.
The logic board problems aren’t from Ibooks.
Who cares about the missed Itunes hit, this isn’t a SEC filing.
The G5 is unfortunate yes, but we are aware of major supply issues from IBM (hence the delayed Imac you mentioned, god read what you also posted before you rant)
The above goes for the Xserve also. Those who have them are happy and once supply issues are worked out…
Powermac sales not hitting their target? Ahh, theres a thing called supply issues. People are less likely to buy if they can’t get the product, besides its also evidence for its demand
I don’t care how long it takes them to ship it. Having the option for people to buy one and using that money to help Apple and IBM improve their bandwidth to deliver quality hardware and software is a good thing.
Hey, at least they try to make good products. Just look at their competition. They pay no attention to detail and very little to what their customers actually want, IMO. I bet most corps build products and enter markets to outsell their competition, not make good products.
Your argument doesn’t make any sence. There are people who don’t like Apple DRMing iTunes downloads, but Apple has no say in the matter. The music labels said either you DRM iTunes or you won’t have an iTunes.
“apple has 21% of unit sales in the mp3 market when you count all mp3 players.
they have 0% of the flash based market.
they have 70% of the market for hard drive based players and that is now steadily declining now that their competitors are coming after them hard in that segment.
they likewise only have about 40% of the legal download market for songs and that too is declining as the competition heats up. ”
First – your numbers are off.
Second – Apple can’t make iPods (mini or full size) fast enough while others sit on shelves.
Some people have given up waiting for iPods to be available and are buying others for now. Then, like some of my friends after they see what they bought (Creative, Dell, etc.) and then play with my iPod for a little while they go out and buy iPods.
Only one of my friends who bought the Creative isn’t buying an iPod. Why? He acknowledges that the iPod is better (without me even asking or pestering or anything) but he just doesn’t want to buy what everyone else is buying. He told me that. Then I asked him about his Windows computers (desktop and laptop) and he didn’t know what to say. Another of my friends said he has been looking at his iPod and bets that the last hold out won’t be holding out much longer. He hates the Creative but won’t admit it to me.
“Mossberg: It isn’t going to be very hard to put Kodak into the iPod.
Jobs: It’s not just Kodak; it’s the whole DRM scene. It is a lot of work. ”
I read the interview but don’t have a clue what this is about. What are they talking about? Putting pictures from Kodak cameras into iPods? Or is Kodak coming out with a music store?
> Your argument doesn’t make any sence. There are people who don’t like
> Apple DRMing iTunes downloads, but Apple has no say in the matter. The
> music labels said either you DRM iTunes or you won’t have an iTunes.
Heck, it makes less sense than none. Darius is whining like the iPod only plays AAC. If that were the case, there might be a point there but nothing is stopping anyone from buying music on CD and ripping to mp3 for the iPod. And the kvetching of “iPod won’t play WMA”…why not complain to the sellers that they don’t sell anything that plays on the iPod. They could sell mp3s…oh, right…not if it has to involve DRM. That, at least, could be a legitimate criticism of Apple but then again, most of these kvetchers also kvetch about DRM so it’s really just Apple bashing.
God, I hate when people spread lies. I am no Apple fan, but I don’t understand why people feel the need to bash a company when they have done nothing but innovate and pushed other companies to do the same.
Let’s debunk the rubbish:
1. They have 0% of the flash based market.
***They also have 0% of the #2 Pencil market. They don’t make that product.
2. They have 70% of the market for hard drive based players and that is now steadily declining now that their competitors are coming after them hard in that segment.
***Actually, the opposite is true. More units shipping, at an accelerating rate. Yes, there is more competition, but the “iPod Killers” have been anything but.
3. They likewise only have about 40% of the legal download market for songs and that too is declining as the competition heats up.
****40% is a made-up number, and the market share has increased as they have opened more countries.
5. Not making their target sales for songs in the first year
***Apple’s original target was 1M songs. Then 10M songs. They beat them both. They missed the 100M number due to Pepsi
6. Not even giving away their target with the pepsi promotion
***Apple has discussed this publicly, and Pepsi did not get enough tops out
7. ibook logic board failures at super high rates
***One manufacturing run had bad motherboards. Apple still will repair them for free, even out of warranty.
8. Out of stock and no imacs to sell in key back to school season
***They will make the current back to school season, and Apple has discussed this openly. Yes, they screwed up not having them sooner, but they had to put a G5 in the new iMac, and yields have been low.
9. No speed increase on the powermac towers in 14 months
***A bold face lie. Try http://www.apple.com
10. Still no 2.5ghz g5 that you can buy and put in your hands
***I have mine under my desk right now.
11. Powermac 2.5ghz macs still showing 4 to 6 weeks on apple store for availability
***And your point is? Yes, demand is high for these amazing machines.
12. Powermac sales not hitting their targets for two quarters running
***Please. Like you know Apple’s sales targets. Spare us.
13. xserves shipping late and extremely limited quantities
***True, they were late, but they have same day shipping right now. Doesn’t sound too limited to me.
I agree with you in one aspect, I hate DRM too. I don’t use it. I usually rip CDs onto my iBook. I use MP3 too ’cause I know that it can be played on anything so I’m not tied down to a particular piece of software or hardware.
Your point about the iTMS doesn’t hold much water though. The DRM was insisted upon by the record companies. I blame the record companies for the DRM and the fact that their CDs are so damn expensive.
Compared to MS, iTunes offers alternative encoders for free unlike WMP. You can use MP3 and still use iTunes and the iPod without any problems. I hardly see that as being “locked in”.
Apple has every right not to want Real to hack the iPod into playing Real formats. Apple worked very hard at making iTMS, iTunes, the iPod and Fair Play all work and they did a very good job. Now Real wants to jump on the band wagon. Can you really blame Apple for not liking what Real is trying to do?
just like microsoft
They were talking about codecs (specifically, WMA) but the transcriber messed up.
And the kvetching of “iPod won’t play WMA”…why not complain to the sellers that they don’t sell anything that plays on the iPod.
Well, that’s what Real tried to do – they approached Apple to obtain a license and/or do whatever it is they need to do to make their file format play on iPods. When Apple told Real to go screw themselves, Real released a software update that would let their format play on iPods. Now, Apple is in a tizzy over this and they say that they will purposely prevent Real’s format from being able to be played on an iPod in a future software and/or firmware update. And that is where they cross the line.
So it’s not Apple’s DRM that I have a problem with, but the fact that they are trying hard to keep other people’s DRM-enabled tunes off the iPod.
I don’t have any CDs (I’ve bought maybe 3 since 1998), so I am mainly interested in the music I can legally buy online, but I don’t know if any portable device that can play music downloaded from all services, and Apple sure isn’t making things any easier.
Apple has every right not to want Real to hack the iPod into playing Real formats.
Then you must logically conslude that Microsoft has every right not to want Linux on their Xbox, and also not to want to sure their file format specs with competitors, and Ford has the right to tell you what kind of car stereo you can put in your vehicle.
Now Real wants to jump on the band wagon. Can you really blame Apple for not liking what Real is trying to do?
No, not really. Apple makes little-to-no money on the iTunes service, which is just there to sell iPods. If they set it up so that I could play music downloaded from ITMS AND Rhapsody, I’d be very tempted to go out and buy one. Anyway, if I buy an iPod, the decision fo whether or not to play Real’s format on MY iPod is MY decision, not theirs. You guys gonna buy computers in the future if there’s a license attached to them that says you can’t run any OS other than Windows?
Anyway, since Apple seems content to tell me what file formats I can and cannot play on hardware that I bought and paid for, then I am content to give Apple the middle finger – it’ll be a cold day in hell before I buy any of their wares.
how bout you innovate and put a FSB on your computer for once?
(fixed with G5, but apples shot themselves in the foot so many times over this its not even funny)
Apple will make iTunes for Motorola’s Windows Mobile smartphone.
Than all the rest is “stupidity”.
I don’t think Apple or MS have a problem w/ you modifying your software to play Ogg Vorbis/Linux or whatever. The contention is that most people who make such modifications do not want to take responsibility when something goes wrong when they go modifying the internals. You want your iPod to play FLAC that cool, but don’t go complaining to Apple if you loose your entire library of songs. Also, if you fry your harddrive because you installed some firmware from eyeP0dh4x3rs.com guess you have to deal w/ it.
The problem w/ Real is that they are modifying iPod’s w/o any sort of support. They upgrade the hardware w/ no liability of fault; and in most cases this will fall back on Apple.
I really don’t have a problem w/ folks putting linux on the xBox and actually think it’s a neat idea. However, consumers need to realize that as soon as you crack the hardware open (both figuratively and abstractly) you rights to service are phucko.
When I read posts like yours I remember the book my friend was reading called “The Programming of the American Mind” where people are no longer able to tell the difference between lies and truth.
The main purpose of DRM in iTunes is to comply with the wishes of the OWNERS of the property – the record industry. I deliberately put owners in caps there because I know very soon someone is going to be resonding with the line “Apple is aiding the RIAA…”.
I could go point for point in some dragged out debate, suffice it to say if you understand “in order to change (or at least have an effect on) a system you have to work within the system not without it” then you understand why there was/is no other way.
I do not believe a “highly moral/ethical” person like you present yourself to be would be defending Real – these are the same “GOOD” people that threatened joining the “WHITE KNIGHT (MS)” whom they loathe just as a ploy to get a business deal – yes, ching-ching($$$) was the bottom line in this very embarrasing and sorry monolgue from Real.
I am mean, can you imagine Jesus threatening Christians that if they did not get their act together he would join Satan. It is obvious you have bought into the “Real is the people’s company/technology that will save you from digital damnation” image that has been aided by the open-sourcing of some of the platform.
It is obvious that Apple cares about consumers that’s why their product decisions never make sense to many technophobes who are more into the latest v16 and how much horsepower they can get/$.
I do not know about you but I would take the 256MB and last years graphics card IFF the company is investing so much in improving their OS that it handles multiple applications better than a PC/XP box with 512MB. Have you noticed how much OS X has grown (physical size of OS in MB) in the last 3 years and yet performance has has barely suffered.
Now in Tiger they add an extra layer of indirection/abstraction (database/metadata filesystem) and word is performance is either the same or marginally better. Try asking MS to add, say, 75 – 100MB of features to XP and see how well it performs. To give you a hint, MS is recommeding something like 2TB HDD, 1GB RAM + graphic cards that will probably debut sometime next year as the preffered specs to run Longhorn.
And yet Apple is running a large (approaching 75%) subset of the features of Longhorn on macs that are 2 years old. With Tiger, the featureset is on par (albeit w/different implementations of the same concepts). Some people will have religious discussions about the implementations’ technical superiority but Apple has previously shown that they truly do think different (remember when servers came w/standard HDD vs. SCSI and everybody said they were crazy).
In closing, I will say that if you think that there is any – I mean ANY comparison between MS and Apple’s ethical records then you truly are lost. One of the unfortunate side-effects of the DOJ case against MS was that it made it seems like these practices by MS are recent, most likely brought about by unexpected competition (internet) and alternative platforms (internet, Java, browser, XUL, etc.).
What many do not know is that THIS WAS STANDARD MS OPERATING STRATEGY AND PHILOSOPHY FROM DAY ONE. Just read a little about the early history of BASIC/VB
here: http://www.igeek.com/articles/History/VisualBASIC.txt
Notice how Apple is constantly the victim almost to the point of naivety. I know some would love to leave this forum with that as it would mean they still come out on top but before you do that I would point point out the authors closing statements:
… Microsoft played to the lower tendencies and emotions in humanity (sloth, laziness, and love of things cheap and easy). Apple tried to play to the higher ones (doing it right, learning from your past, growth). Microsoft usually won. I think that says a lot about humanity…
AND
Bill Gates created his empire (and the Microsoft Business model) by ripping off everyone he could; and none more than Apple. But when he copies Apple the result is like Apple’s evil twin; he twists every goal and intent just a little to give himself (and his company) more power and further restrict competition in the market. Inside of Microsoft it was a common “joke” to call Apple “R&D south” because of how many of their ideas they got directly from Apple. The thing that astounds me (and many other people in the know) is how often MS gets credit for things they did not create.
Apple is not flawless but their philosophy is substantially different. Apple was a bunch of temperamental “artists” trying to create something new; their problem was follow-thru and dropping things after they lost interest or not realizing the value of what they had. Microsoft was a bunch of insecure wannabe dictators trying to control the world and WIN (to make up for personal insecurities) through any means necessary. Both companies corporate cultures seem to have had some of their founders’ personalities rub off on them.
… and remember, this is only a microcosm of MS history. If you want a more detailed account, check this out (in the spiit of objectivity ;-). Personally, I got digusted and did not even complete reading the article. Ignore the title (the author did himself some injustice), this is a very fact-oriented post with little opinion type stuff…
here: http://www.euronet.nl/users/frankvw/rants/microsoft/IhateMS.html
“He dodged a few core questions.”
Ya, the questions he dodged were of the type that were asking for insider information. For example, the reporter was trying to see if they had a movie download service.
“Most of his answers sounded like advertisements.”
Perhaps because the questions were structured that way.
“He totally avoided answering the question on the iPod’s ability to play other formats.”
Because the reporter had a negative bend to her questions.
“Maybe the real reason is that MS won’t license it to Apple”
No, the reason plain and simple is Apple doesn’t wont to proliferate a standard which Microsoft has an incentive in making play inferior on Macintoshes.
“maybe it’s Apple being snobby…”
Or maybe its Apple just exhibiting logical business sense.
“It’s annoying when people do interviews and then are not up front.”
Even worse is reporters with an agenda to fill.
He totally avoided answering the question on the iPod’s ability to play other formats.
What are all the other formats the iPod won’t play? Oh yeah, only Windows Media. Who cares?
I have a choice of ripping CDs as either MP3 or AAC at bit rates of my choosing. DRM only applies if I purchase music downloaded from an on-line source. Am I, as a consumer, supposed to care that Microsoft can’t insert their technology into my iPod?
“It always happens at Apple. Jobs comes in takes control, does wonderful things, and then things spin out of control.”
Oh c’mon. How are things spinning out of control? Every area where Apple competes it is doing very well in. (Except for the iMac which is scheduled for a revision)
“Jobs needs to go and let somebody else run the ship again…”
Jobs is the saving grace of the company. Everything he touches turns to gold.
So Apple is trying to use this encrypted AAC file format to lock people into iTunes and iPod.”
A person isn’t locked in if they never want to get out.
“If MS were to do something like this, people would be proclaiming that Bill Gates is The Great Satan.”
MS does do it and they simply aren’t successful at it. If they were though people WOULD regard them as the great satan because the company would be locking them into a n inferior product.
“But when Apple does it, Mac apologists say their just doing good business.”
Yes, because Apple *IS* just doing good business.
IMHO, these DRM-enabled file formats have got to go, unless htey standardize on just one.”
I agree with you. there really only should be one standard. All the others should go away. But then, there already IS a standard in digital music downloads. Apple uses it. Apple established it.
“Imagine walking into a music store and they told you that the CDs they sold only worked on their brand of CD players. How long would you put up with that?”
If the CD player was the best on the market and was reasonable priced as compared to the competition… then I’d be quite happy with it. That’s what it is now… and people can’t get enough iPods. They can’t make them fast enough.
“Or in the case of Apple trying to keep Real’s file formats off the iPod, what gives them the right?”
They have the right because its their software and their hardware. They made it. They dictate the standard that best meets both theirs and their customer’s best interests.
“What if you were to buy a new Ford car and they put a clause in the contract that said you couldn’t drive on any street where there was a Chevy dealership?
That would be bad… but thankfully, your analogy does not relate to the iPod.
The problem w/ Real is that they are modifying iPod’s w/o any sort of support. They upgrade the hardware w/ no liability of fault; and in most cases this will fall back on Apple.
Real did not ‘hack’ the iPod and they don’t update the firmware in the iPod. They came up with a way of making their DRM scheme compatitble so that the iPod will play a file from the Real Music store. Thats all they did. It ain’t coming back on apple because they aren’t modifying the iPod in any way.
>>>“And the kvetching of “iPod won’t play WMA”…why not complain to the sellers that they don’t sell anything that plays on the iPod.”
“Well, that’s what Real tried to do – they approached Apple to obtain a license and/or do whatever it is they need to do to make their file format play on iPods. When Apple told Real to go screw themselves”
Well naturally. Real’s goal is to displace Quicktime. Why would Apple help promote a competitor? Real could JUST as easily sell songs in QuickTime/AAC and then license the DRM.
“Real released a software update that would let their format play on iPods.”
Yes, and that is wrong. If they were THAT interested in making a music download store they should have made them available in QuickTime AAC.
“Now, Apple is in a tizzy over this and they say that they will purposely prevent Real’s format from being able to be played on an iPod in a future software and/or firmware update.”
Sounds fair to me.
“And that is where they cross the line.”
Where real crossed the line… yes.
“So it’s not Apple’s DRM that I have a problem with, but the fact that they are trying hard to keep other people’s DRM-enabled tunes off the iPod.”
No, just those that potentially destroy their leading (tied) position in in digital video/audio. It makes perfect sense to me.
“I don’t have any CDs (I’ve bought maybe 3 since 1998), so I am mainly interested in the music I can legally buy online, but I don’t know if any portable device that can play music downloaded from all services, and Apple sure isn’t making things any easier.”
We should be interested in the most dominant player… That player should be the one Apple should make sure is compatible with AAC DRM. Anything less would be rediculious… oh wait a second THAT’S WHAT THEY’RE DOING NOW!
>>>”[/i]Apple has every right not to want Real to hack the iPod into playing Real formats.”[/i]
“Then you must logically conslude that Microsoft has every right not to want Linux on their Xbox”
If and when Microsoft has a DRM mechanism in the XBOX that makes it illegal for someone to put Linux on it then yes… it would be wrong then… but the XBOX doesn’t have a DRM mechanism.
“and also not to want to sure their file format specs with competitors”
If Microsoft made the the dominant hardware and the dominant software… then yes… they should not create open file formats… but because Microsoft ONLY makes the software and because there are MANY different hardware manufacturers… they are not creating a top to bottom solution and therefore should make open file formats.
“and Ford has the right to tell you what kind of car stereo you can put in your vehicle.”
If Ford felt doing so would better server their customers as well as the company’s best interests, then yes… that would be acceptable…. but its not, so they don’t. Your analogy doesn’t work if you’re trying to draw paralyls to the iPod.
>>>”Now Real wants to jump on the band wagon. Can you really blame Apple for not liking what Real is trying to do?”
“No, not really. Apple makes little-to-no money on the iTunes service, which is just there to sell iPods. If they set it up so that I could play music downloaded from ITMS AND Rhapsody, I’d be very tempted to go out and buy one.”
Apparently you and people like you are very much in the minority, as the iPod is selling like crazy.
“Anyway, if I buy an iPod, the decision fo whether or not to play Real’s format on MY iPod is MY decision, not theirs.”
Your argument is akin to me demanding that it is MY right for the playboy channel to play on the same channels as that which the network affiliates broadcast on. After all… its MY tv. I should have it they way I want.
Meanwhile, such an argument doesn’t consider the fact that its not in the best interests of the network affiliates or their viewers to have the playboy channel broadcast on the station that I want it to be on. The same is true for Apple, the iPod and iTunes and their competitor’s solutions.
“You guys gonna buy computers in the future if there’s a license attached to them that says you can’t run any OS other than Windows?”
No, that would be rediculious… but would you believe it, Microsoft has tried on several occations to do exactly that? They tried to make it illegal to put any other OS on your computer other than the one you bought or any other one from Microsoft.
The reason why this is so bad, is because Microsoft is not a total solution provider… they don’t make the hardware and software. They are one element in a compartmentalized product. If they created the entire product… both hardware and software… they would be totally within their right.
“Anyway, since Apple seems content to tell me what file formats I can and cannot play on hardware that I bought and paid for, then I am content to give Apple the middle finger”
And while you are free to do so… you are out of place with that reaction.
“it’ll be a cold day in hell before I buy any of their wares.”
Good. More for the people who know how to appreciate a good thing when they see it.
“…they have 70% of the market for hard drive based players and that is now steadily declining now that their competitors are coming after them hard in that segment.”
You’re not kidding on this point, at least. Check out this iPod killer (Neuros II)…
http://www.neurosaudio.com/
Xiph.Org is a partner…
http://www.neurosaudio.com/press/news_item.aspx?itemID=80
Plays OGG, MP3, WMA, WAV, FM Radio
Neuros Synchronization Manager is an open-sourced application
True, no iTunes, but MusicMatch 9.0 (and others) work fine for me…
Apple has created a really nice consumer electronics device but there is nothing magical about that industry that is going to let the iPod stay in front forever…
“Real did not ‘hack’ the iPod and they don’t update the firmware in the iPod. They came up with a way of making their DRM scheme compatitble so that the iPod will play a file from the Real Music store.”
Yes. Its unfortunate that you insist on watering this down, but this is an illegal practice. It was disallowed when they click the agree button after installing iTunes.
If Apple is going to do video, they should do it right! Movies want BIG screens, not wristwatches. Projection TVs go for under a thousand dollars nowadays. How about a $1500 box with a projector, a hard drive, a video card and a firewire interface?
It wouldn’t synch with iMovie. It would have to synch with a movie archive manager that supports previews and access to a movie store. Maybe they can start with iTunes and its music video features?
You’d buy the movie, or just download it free. You could preview it, watch it on a flight or in your car. Otherwise, you could synch it into your movie jukebox and watch it on a wall or a screen.
Maybe it should have a DVD slot so you can slip in a DVD and rip it?
Do I hear the movie industry gagging?
Eugenia,
i’m wondering if it was wise to post this story. Sure, the story is a very appropriate for a site like this, but with a title like which the author gave it, you have to expect all these trolls in here that suggest that Apple is somehow at fault for creating a platform that they control. Its obviously the best thing for consumers and the business.
If you are going to post stories like this, its important that you stay on top of anyone that makes the types of comments that dominated the *1* section of the thread… that you either correct the trolls or mod them all down.. even the ones that have a fairly respectible post but insist on spreading FUD in one sentance. You can’t (you shouldn’t) have it both ways. (I say you shouldn’t because currently you ARE having it both ways… no matter how wrong that setup is.
Why not have an a move version of the iTunes music store and then get the TV equivilent to airport express?
that sounds far more logical IMHO.
>>So Apple is trying to use this encrypted AAC file format
>>to lock people into iTunes and iPod.”
>A person isn’t locked in if they never want to get out.
WRONG: A person is locked in if they cannot get it out. THIS IS A LOCK IN.
Thats like saying microsoft does not try to lock people in, because people do not want get out. But wait some people do, and wait some people do with apple also.
>>If MS were to do something like this, people would be
>>proclaiming that Bill Gates is The Great Satan.”
>MS does do it and they simply aren’t successful at it. If
>they were though people WOULD regard them as the great
>satan because the company would be locking them into
>an inferior product.
Your opinion, but his point holds.
>>But when Apple does it, Mac apologists say their just
>>doing good business.
>Yes, because Apple *IS* just doing good business.
Again, Your opinion, but his point holds.
>>IMHO, these DRM-enabled file formats have got to go,
>>unless htey standardize on just one.
>I agree with you. there really only should be on
>standard. All the others should go away. But then,
>there already IS a standard in digital music downloads.
>Apple uses it. Apple established it.
WRONG: Is not a standard if no one else can legally use it
Add the rest of your points are equally retarded. Mac apologists crack me up.
I just lost about 30 minutes worth of typing when I accidentally hit the Back button. This usually doesn’t happen in Firefox, but oh well. I’m not going to bother to retype it all, except to say this …
Anyway, for the guy that said Apple has the right to do what they do because they’re a ‘total solutions provider’ (which I disagree with, since they can’t/won’t sell me 100% of the music I want to listen to), I don’t think customers should be expected to gleefully take it up the ass from Apple just because they’re selling the hardware. IMHO, you can take a little more liberty with software at dictating its use because software is easily redistributable, whereas hardware isn’t. I won’t let some company tell me what I can do with my car, so I also will not let a company tell me what I can do with a portable music device.
And the sad thing is, we don’t even have to have DRM at all. If we would just come together as a whole and tell the entire music industry ‘Either you’re going to sell us DRM-less devices and music and sell us CDs for $5 a piece or you’re going out of business’, then they would have a choice to make at that point. Why don’t we exercise this power we have?
Anyway, for the guy that said Apple has the right to do what they do because they’re a ‘total solutions provider’ (which I disagree with, since they can’t/won’t sell me 100% of the music I want to listen to)
Which is true, except that the majority of music anyone has on a portable music player comes from their CD collection; not from the iTMS (or perhaps for some, from Gnutella et al).
Is it limiting to be able to be able to use any music store or CD provider for your music library? I don’t see why the big hang up about the convenience of the iTMS for some additional songs.
umm, excuse me, but I am not locked in if I do not buy iTMS Music. and even then I have nice apps like Hymn that takes the DRM off and lets me transcode it into MP3 with only 1 generation of loss, and even then, it is low if I transcode to a high bitrate MP3. OR, I could burn them, all to CD and rip them to MP3.
I am not locked in, but if I buy lossy music, I have to live with transcode quality.
“‘Either you’re going to sell us DRM-less devices and music and sell us CDs for $5 a piece or you’re going out of business'”
And how do you propose you do this? Continued assault on copyrights? Or were you actually suggesting people grow a spine and either put up or shtut up and quit having anything to do with popular music? If it’s the former, I hope you get busted.
Personally I don’t want the music industry to go to digital downloads only. I prefer to rip music to the format and bitrate of my choosing straight from the CD (which I keep around for backup). And don’t give me the “one good song” line of BS. If you’re buying CDs with only one good song then perhaps you need to find better bands to listen to or learn to like the rest of the CD.
Yes. Its unfortunate that you insist on watering this down, but this is an illegal practice. It was disallowed when they click the agree button after installing iTunes.
If you use Real’s Harmony technology you never have to load iTunes.
You aren’t bound by an iTunes EULA because you don’t have to install iTunes to use Harmony.
If it were illegal then why is apple not suing ? Why is Apple trying to create a firmware update to disable it ? Seems to me if it were illegal they could easily just take Real to court and I see no sign of that one happening.
Real created a compatible file format. Thats all they did. To claim they hacked the iPod or present it like Real is going to update the iPod firmware when you install Harmony is just flat out wrong and misinformed.
Powermac sales not hitting their target? Ahh, theres a thing called supply issues. People are less likely to buy if they can’t get the product, besides its also evidence for its demand
PowerMac’s aren’t the only ones in short supply. Talk to any vendor in Australia and the number of people waiting for *ANY* Apple computer. The problem with Apple is that it has demand, but unable to keep up with it; if they expand too rapidly they will end up in a situation where they have redundant capacity when demand tappers off, however, if they don’t have enough capacity, customers get grumbly about the delays.
Anonymous (IP: —.bak.rr.com) – Posted on 2004-08-07 01:42:19
I have a choice of ripping CDs as either MP3 or AAC at bit rates of my choosing. DRM only applies if I purchase music downloaded from an on-line source. Am I, as a consumer, supposed to care that Microsoft can’t insert their technology into my iPod?
Agreed. Its like the bitch’n and whine’n about real format. Real player, quite frankly is the biggest piece of shit that has ever graced gods green earth, it makes Microsofts beta labelled programmes look half decent.
Real failed to get with the reality, people aren’t going to give away their details just to down Real Player, the aren’t going to skip through 100 hoops just to find that “free player” whilst at every opportunity Real tries to trick the customer into believing that the only option is to purchase “Real Player Plus” (what an oxymoron).
Real has dug its own grave, the sooner the bloody thing goes under, the better it is for all concerned. The format is crap, the player is crap, the encoder is crap and the management of the company makes Apples management during the early 1990s look absolutely fabulous.
RE: Darius (IP: —.dsl.austtx.swbell.net) – Posted on 2004-08-07 03:56:33
And the sad thing is, we don’t even have to have DRM at all. If we would just come together as a whole and tell the entire music industry ‘Either you’re going to sell us DRM-less devices and music and sell us CDs for $5 a piece or you’re going out of business’, then they would have a choice to make at that point. Why don’t we exercise this power we have?
Well, we wouldn’t need to have DRM if we didn’t have the Terry Tightass’s, Charlie Cheapskates and Peter Pirates out there ripping the music businesses off on a regular basis. I don’t pirate music or software CD’s myself; if I want something I pay for it, however, the current “honesty” policy isn’t working. As so long as I can continue using my software and music in the way I use it now if they widely implement DRM, I quite frankly don’t give a toss what they do.
RE: me (IP: —.ne.client2.attbi.com) – Posted on 2004-08-07 05:01:48
And don’t give me the “one good song” line of BS. If you’re buying CDs with only one good song then perhaps you need to find better bands to listen to or learn to like the rest of the CD.
Or better yet, if the person likes that one song, why not buy a compilation with that one song on it along with a whole heap of other good songs?
Real’s music store doesn’t work on a mac.
that is pretty funny, lol
Anonymous (IP: —.bak.rr.com)
Which is true, except that the majority of music anyone has on a portable music player comes from their CD collection; not from the iTMS
Well, this is definitely not me.
s it limiting to be able to be able to use any music store or CD provider for your music library?
Yes.
I don’t see why the big hang up about the convenience of the iTMS for some additional songs.
Because CDs in the future are going to be copy-protected, and whether or not they’ll even work on iPods without having to dance around the DRM is iffy at this point.
me
“‘Either you’re going to sell us DRM-less devices and music and sell us CDs for $5 a piece or you’re going out of business'”
And how do you propose you do this? Continued assault on copyrights?
No, I’m saying boycott ALL CDs and ALL online music stores while at the same time stop pirating songs via P2P and elsewhere. Do this just long enough for the RIAA to choke on their own greed.
kaiwai
Well, we wouldn’t need to have DRM if we didn’t have the Terry Tightass’s, Charlie Cheapskates and Peter Pirates out there ripping the music businesses off on a regular basis.
Wrong. DRM does absolutely nothing to stop piracy. If people want to steal music, they will do it either with or without copy protection. People need to wake up and realize that DRM is not about trying to curb piracy – it’s an attempt for the big media companies to control where, when, and how you use your media. I believe their ultimate goal is to have a credit card swipe installed on all computer keyboards so they can pump you in the ass a little bit deeper – “We’re sorry, but your subscription to this song has expired – time to pay the piper!”
your plan is great, it is also a plan that many have said since 1999 but alas, it is impossible!!!!
you cannot criticize a company that wants to sell music to its hardware customers and has to play by the rules of the owners of the music while at the same time believing that your plan has ANY chance in succeeding.
Isn’t it interesting. Some folks are willing to admit, and think, that stealing something is right and just for them. And anyone who does not agree is either stupid or ignorant, or both.
The people who produce and/or perform the music deserve to have a chance to make a profit off of their efforts. Just because you think that you are being overcharged does not give one the right to steal the property. The correct solution is to not purchase the item(s) in question. And, yes, you can even proclaim, IYHO, that the price is too high. But rip off anothers work is unethical, unlawful, and immoral. Shame on you.
As for the idea that you are locked out by a particular hardware/software device is simply not true. Yes, they do try to limit your ability to abuse the property rights while also giving you limited rights. However, you are not locked out if you wish to circumvent that privilage. You can always steal it with the rationale that it is your right. But, please, be smart enough to not admit that you are dishonest.
Or, better, keep it it so we know who you are.
“Anyway, for the guy that said Apple has the right to do what they do because they’re a ‘total solutions provider’ (which I disagree with, since they can’t/won’t sell me 100% of the music I want to listen to),”
Then why don’t you get on Sony’s case for not letting you upgrade the UI in a car stereo? Of course I’m being facecious here. Sony creates the hardware and software for their stereo and thus they don’t have to play by the rules of a compartmentalized computer business model which dictates that a compartmentalized computer should allow ever other compartmentalized product to work with the others. When you create both hardware and software, you’re creating a complete solution that doesn’t have to work under the same umbrella.
“I won’t let some company tell me what I can do with my car, so I also will not let a company tell me what I can do with a portable music device.”
Yes you do.When you bought your car stereo, you were forced to use the software that it came with.
“And the sad thing is, we don’t even have to have DRM at all. If we would just come together as a whole and tell the entire music industry ‘Either you’re going to sell us DRM-less devices and music and sell us CDs for $5 a piece or you’re going out of business’, then they would have a choice to make at that point. Why don’t we exercise this power we have?”
Unfortunately most of the world cares less about DRM.
“If it were illegal then why is apple not suing ?”
It is illegal because they had to agree to the EULA that specificly dictates that they cant do what they did. Additionally, what makes you think that they don’t intend on suing?
“Why is Apple trying to create a firmware update to disable it ? Seems to me if it were illegal they could easily just take Real to court and I see no sign of that one happening.”
The reason Apple would create the update is to break the illegal control they would have. The lawsuit (that will inevitably come) will get them damages as a result of Real’s actions as well as restrict them from making the software.
“Real created a compatible file format. Thats all they did.”
And went against the EULA that they agrred to when they launched iTunes for the first time. That is illegal.
Debman
your plan is great, it is also a plan that many have said since 1999 but alas, it is impossible!!!!
It’s definitely not impossible. The RIAA (and the rest of Corporate America) reminds of that bully back in school that everybody was afraid to stand up to, when all it would’ve taken is a few people to work together to beat his ass.
Ronald Crain
As for the idea that you are locked out by a particular hardware/software device is simply not true. Yes, they do try to limit your ability to abuse the property rights while also giving you limited rights. However, you are not locked out if you wish to circumvent that privilage. You can always steal it with the rationale that it is your right.
All I’m saying is that if I buy a portable music device, I want to be able to play music … in anyformat on this device that I have legally bought, without having to get permission from the hardware manufacurer first. How is that theft? Hell, I don’t even have any pirated music on any of my computers or mp3 player.
pico de geeko
> When you create both hardware and software, you’re creating a complete solution that
> doesn’t have to work under the same umbrella.
“I won’t let some company tell me what I can do with my car, so I also will not let a company tell me what I can do with a portable music device.”
> Yes you do.When you bought your car stereo, you were forced to use the software that it
> came with.
So your argument here is that since Apple produces both the hardware and the software, they have a right to dictate to me how I can use that device? Ok, let me throw this analogy at you …
You buy a cell phone from Cingular that comes with built-in software, and maybe even an infrared port so you can sync up your address book to your PC, or whatever. Since they are providing you with both the hardware and the software, do they then have a right to tell you that you can’t use another piece of software to do the syncing with instead of the one they provided you? Or better yet, do they have the right to tell you that you can’t use your new phone to contact Verizon about possible better rates of service?
If other stores want to make their songs compatible with the iPod, then they should just use one of its supported formats, like MP3, AIFF, WAV, etc. If they don’t wish to do so, then it is their decision.
I don’t think teh RIAA would let them do that.
First, Real did break the EULA and therefore the law. Even if Apple was OK with what they were doing, they can’t let it slide, because they would have less of a leg to stand on in court later should other competion start doing this sort of thing – getting a free ride at Apple’s expense.
Second, keep in mind that Apple has a contract with the major labels and that has it’s own set of rules and regulations. It is more than likely that letting Real get away with this could sour the deal with the labels when the contract is up for review again. I have no doubt that the language in the contract is very specific to these kinds of things. Apple probably can’t afford to have a changing landscape in regards to the iTMS business model at this time. I’m sure the store is still very much under scrutiny by the RIAA.
Blame the RIAA if you want, but Apple just created a store that while you are free to use it, you are just as free not to. They’ve allowed you the biggest standard in digital music file formats there is: MP3. and an easy way to get your purchased CD’s onto the iPod. That’s simply not lock-in no matter what you argue.
Remember, the iPod was first and foremost a way to carry all of your CD collection with you. It still does that admirably, but there are added features now should you care to use them – one is: it plays song files downloaded from iTMS.
Real has also had it’s own players and music service with it’s own set of restrictions. I believe the CEO could have handled his negotiations with Apple a lot better. Instead he acted like a 3 yr old and used threats and scare tactics, and ultimately just chose to exploit Apple with Harmony.
iPod being the most popular product, if doesn’t support other online store music then it is essentially killing other business. I have a samsung MP3 player and all i need is MP3 files to play on it.
Apple is not a monopoly. Yes, there are different rules when a company is a monopoly. Otherwise, what you describe is simply healthy competition. At this point, any company can roll up their sleeves and come up with a much better solution than Apple’s. Just, no one has yet.
Wait a second here. Real first went to Apple and asked them to allow Reals format to play on iPods. Apple told them they didn’t want to spend the time and resources on it because it wasn’t profitable. That’s reasonable. So then Real ‘hacks’ the iPod so that Rhapsody downloaded songs play on it. I use the term hack because the iPod license agreement states that you can’t alter the software in any way. Apples response it that they won’t put the effort out to support Reals software. They aren’t locking it out, and they aren’t taking Real to court. They are simply leaving them be, and they aren’t putting forth the time and effort to support Reals software. They are doing exactly what they told Real they would do in the first place, nothing. Apples only statement to the whole issue was to say they won’t promise someone else’s software works with future updates. It’s like saying they won’t put someone else’s product under their warranty. This, too, sounds reasonable. They haven’t sued anyone, and they haven’t tried to stop anyone from doing anything, they have just decided not to help them. They build, operate, and sell their own products, products that work very well. They put out the effort to support their own stores format, and many open formats. Think about this, playing codecs on iPods requires the ability to decode the codec. It’s been stated many times by Apple that iPods use hardware decoders. This decoder comes from the factory with the ability to decode MPEG based codecs (MP3, AAC), AIF, WAV, and WMA. Apple has the rights to use all but WMA, so they use them. If they decide to use WMA, they have to pay royalties to MS for every iPod they sell. So to support all these other people stores, they not only have to help out their competitors by degrading their own market position, but they also have to pay royalties to their competitors. That makes absolutely no business sense. So all in all, they aren’t going to pay a MS so that everyone else can use iPods, hence the license agreement (insurance so to speak), but they aren’t stopping anyone from doing it themselves (Real isn’t being sued), they just aren’t helping them either (so they don’t get sued or have to pay out the ass to MS).
Now for user choice. You have a choice, use an open standard. Those play on iPods. You can either go the Apple route and use iTMS and it’s format, or go another route and get another player with it’s store. You just can’t mix and match everything on the market. It’s that way in all markets.
i think im about to go back to tapes. no messing with incompatible formats and drm, just audio bliss (as long as you can survive a bit of analog noice that is, nothing is perfect).
this is the video wars all over again (alltho i missed them, i still know of them as the war storys still float around)…
First, Real did break the EULA and therefore the law.
You might want to study up on what actually happened with Real’s Harmony technology.
Even if Apple was OK with what they were doing, they can’t let it slide, because they would have less of a leg to stand on in court later should other competion start doing this sort of thing – getting a free ride at Apple’s expense.
Uh if you use Harmony to play music on an iPod you just gave money to apple – you bought an iPod. How is this ‘getting a free ride’ at the expense of apple exactly ?
Second, keep in mind that Apple has a contract with the major labels and that has it’s own set of rules and regulations. It is more than likely that letting Real get away with this could sour the deal with the labels when the contract is up for review again.
Ok this is where you are really lost on the whole situation. This has NOTHING to do with the iTMS, beyond giving a consumer a choice to use music from Real’s music store. Real has a contract with the record labels also. You didn’t think that Apple was the only ones did you ? The DRM isn’t broken, real didn’t release software to strip DRM from iTMS music files and they didn’t tamper with the iPod’s firmware. They made their DRM scheme compatible. Thats all they did.
I have no doubt that the language in the contract is very specific to these kinds of things.
what kinds of things ? What in gods name are you even talking about ?
Apple probably can’t afford to have a changing landscape in regards to the iTMS business model at this time. I’m sure the store is still very much under scrutiny by the RIAA.
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ITMS!
apple has repeatedly stated that their goal is to sell 200,000 powermacs per quarter
they have sold about 180,000 each of the last two quarters. missing their targets by approx 10% each time.
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/may2004/tc20040527_8…
“LOOKING ABROAD. According to one of those chipmakers and to industry analysts, worldwide shipments of digital-music-player chips hit about 15 million last year. An April, 2004, report from investment bank CIBC on this market estimated global sales of flash and hard-drive music players at 17 million. If that’s true, then the 1.5 million iPods sold in 2003 gives Apple 8% to 10% of the global market. In fact, SigmaTel alone sold 9 million chips specifically designed for rival digital-music players, dwarfing iPod sales.”
http://news.com.com/2100-1027_3-5199227.html
look at the chart that shows songs sold by all of the major players in the download music market:
Note that in March of 2004, Apple had 4.9 million song sales and Wal-Mart alone had 2.7 million. That was also Wal-Mart’s first month of operation. If all of the other services are added up, Apple comes nowhere near 70% of the market that they claim…they are in fact less than 40%.
apple is only in a few countries now, and was beaten to market in many of them. they have zero presence in asia.
apple can tell its fake marketing data to the general publikc all they like in an effort to prop up their stock, but for those that have access to accurate data, the lies are exposed.
apple lied about first 64 bit personal computer
they lied about hitting 3ghz with the g5 by june of 2004
and on and on…
Hmmm. I have a Ford. Can I buy a Ford wheel from General Motors. How aout fitting a Ford with a Chrysler carburetor, or vice versa. The iPod allows you to use several different formats. Just because it does not match your format you blame Apple. How about blaming Real for not using industry standards?????
Now, with a little work you should be able to convert the other formats to run on an iPod. Or, maybe you should insist that the other manufacturers of such hardware allow you to play the formats that iPod uses???
The question is not in the hardware. The iPod supports and plays several formats but not all formats. If you download a tune from the iTunes store it will come in only one format, the industry recommended and supported one.
Now, if that is causing you a problem you could easily change it to mp3 or some other format.
So, why are there so many people getting bent out of joint. The player is not the problem and the file format from the iTunes store is not unreasonable. If you do not like it then for heavens sake buy someone elses player and be happy. If none suit you than invent your own and stop wasting so much effort putting down things that do not meet your liking.
“Note that in March of 2004, Apple had 4.9 million song sales and Wal-Mart alone had 2.7 million. That was also Wal-Mart’s first month of operation. If all of the other services are added up, Apple comes nowhere near 70% of the market that they claim…they are in fact less than 40%.”
Also look at how each counts songs. Apple counts by sales, ie and album is a sale, while Wal-Mart counts by song alone, ie album is roughly 12 sales.
“apple is only in a few countries now, and was beaten to market in many of them. they have zero presence in asia.”
They weren’t first to market on any of it, and never claimed to be. They were the first to get all the major labels under one roof, that’s all. And they made it work better than anyone else.
“apple can tell its fake marketing data to the general publikc all they like in an effort to prop up their stock, but for those that have access to accurate data, the lies are exposed.”
Could Apple’s stock possibly be going up because financially the company is doing very well, and there are no downturns in sight?
“apple lied about first 64 bit personal computer”
No they didn’t. You, like many others, are counting workstations.
“they lied about hitting 3ghz with the g5 by june of 2004”
That’s actually called missing a goal, and they weren’t alone in missing goals in that time frame, Intel and AMD did the same thing.
“and on and on…”
Why are you so negative about all this?
“We don’t have to have somebody else. We don’t have to beg somebody else to put features into it, so we just do it ourselves and we innovate.”
Jobs has it totally wrong on this very point.
Innovation has nothing to do with having a big market share.
Innovation is useless if you can’t share it, or can’t use to share.
What bothers the consumer (I, friends, others) is that it is just plain stupid that a portable digital player does not play as many major audio format that exist out there as it is technically possible (and already done, on fully disposable computers). Why should that be different on a computer like the iPod ?
That format limiting stuff is just a market share move. It has nothing to do with innovation, quality, and consumer service.
Or please explain clearly why.
(By the way. That “join the discussion” stuff at the interview website is as stupid : if the form is displayed as I am not logged in, why does it require to be logged in to post ?
The iPod allows you to use several different formats. Just because it does not match your format you blame Apple. How about blaming Real for not using industry standards?????
Ummmm, so what exactly is the industry standard, and why is not Apple using the ‘industry standard’ on ITMS, instead of a bastardized version of AAC? And even if Real and others wanted to use this bastardized version on their players and services, could they even legally do this?
they are using the standard AAC. but the RIAA MAKES THEM ENCRYPT IT!!!!!!!!!!!
oh my god. its like complaining about a car company complying with safety standards!!!!! it is not the car companies fault it is the cost of doing business!!!
well, yeah that would be great and all, except that Apple has a HUGE mind share. in fact a lot of their innovations and styles get picked up in the PC industry. so apple can innovate better because of their position, and the innovations get to those people who USE THEIR PRODUCT and then the PC industry picks up the idea about a year later.
Hmmm. I have a Ford. Can I buy a Ford wheel from General Motors. How aout fitting a Ford with a Chrysler carburetor, or vice versa. The iPod allows you to use several different formats. Just because it does not match your format you blame Apple. How about blaming Real for not using industry standards?????
Real is using industry standards – AAC – The problem is that Apple won’t license FairPlay so Real had to make their own compatability layer.
Real approached apple about licensing FairPlay and apple said no.
oh my god. its like complaining about a car company complying with safety standards!!!!! it is not the car companies fault it is the cost of doing business!!!![/i]
I think you missed the point. Even if we assume for the sake of argument that AAC is an ‘industry standard’ (which it clearly is not), the guy asked why doesn’t Real use an ‘industry standard’ format. Answer? For the same reason that Apple doesn’t – because they can’t. As I’ve said at least once in this thread, I don’t have a problem with that (or at least not a problem with Apple.)
But when Real comes to them and wants to license whatever DRM that Apple uses and Apple says no, essentially Apple is saying to its customers ‘You don’t have permisssion to play Real’s format on an iPod that you legally own.’ So essentially, Apple is pulling a ‘No Linux on Xbox’ Microsoft move here, and you guys refuse to own up to it. I don’t know if Apple is using vasoline or whatever, but some of you seem to like taking it up the ass from Apple much more than Microsoft.
I called it envy because, like PantherPC said, this guy is very negative – bordering on anger at Apple’s recent succeses (or past failures… whatever his issue is). I will add a little more, if you don’t mind PPC…
“Note that in March of 2004, Apple had 4.9 million song sales and Wal-Mart alone had 2.7 million. That was also Wal-Mart’s first month of operation. If all of the other services are added up, Apple comes nowhere near 70% of the market that they claim…they are in fact less than 40%.”
Also look at how each counts songs. Apple counts by sales, ie and album is a sale, while Wal-Mart counts by song alone, ie album is roughly 12 sales.
Very true. And if you look in other areas the results they give out are also conservative (i.e. the same philosophy that PPC is referring to is not a one time thing), e.g. the number of quicktime installations – Apple always/mostly talks about the number of downloads whenever you see them mention, say 200M, they are usually talking about the number of downloads from Apple.com. They do count OEMS deals (cameras, camcorders, etc.).
“apple is only in a few countries now, and was beaten to market in many of them. they have zero presence in asia.”
They weren’t first to market on any of it, and never claimed to be. They were the first to get all the major labels under one roof, that’s all. And they made it work better than anyone else.
GMail was the first to announce uber-storage for free and yet others have beat them to it while their service is not even officially launched. Even you, if you had the money to buy the hardware and pay the engineers could have something up and running in a couple of days.
It is obvious that Google has (probably big) surprises and services that they are going to introduce so for them the whining of the “WE WERE FIRST, WE WERE FIRST!!!!!!!! cheerleading crowd is not exactly the people they let guide their strategies.
Just in case you try to aside the point I am trying to make (which should be obvious by now but I will elaborate) by saying “well it might be obvious to you – not to all of us are privy to internal decisions I suggest you concider this:
http://theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=27554
http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=27163
Anyway, point is Apple want a particular user experience (avearage wont do) with one of the major components being consistency across the globe as much as possible. This would have been way easier if the licensing in the music business was somewhat consistent (conceptually, not mecessarily monetary) but it is not, far from it.
From company to company, country to country (and in Europe, label to label i.e. even less consistent than USA) these things are light years apart. So for someone to set out with a goal of having an identical user experience across these thousands of licenses and businesses ACROSS THE GLOBE would seem like some kind of utopian ideal. “That’s why I am a Mac user” is the easiest way to sum up what I have just described.
I do not care if (IP: —.chvlva.adelphia.net).I_AM_ENVIOUS.COM is the first to market in Ethiopia, Namibia, Thailand… what matters to me is the VALUE ADDED SERVICE. That where my analysis of product differentiation starts… different people have different levels of quality appreciations, its just that some do not set their lower-end acceptance as low as others.
“apple can tell its fake marketing data to the general publikc all they like in an effort to prop up their stock, but for those that have access to accurate data, the lies are exposed.”
Could Apple’s stock possibly be going up because financially the company is doing very well, and there are no downturns in sight?
+1 from here PPC. I guess the so called experts on WallStreet with their fake MBAs and CPAs have been having a tad too much coffee over the last several months as it seems the most skeptical (in the minority) are now rating Apple a “HOLD”.
“apple lied about first 64 bit personal computer”
No they didn’t. You, like many others, are counting workstations.
+1 again. In our everyday happenings we will use the two terms to mean different things (tech people that is) and yet when we want to create an upper hand over someone we don’t like (???, who could that be I wonder) we ignore the differentiation with the excuse that PCs/workstations are now one and the same… I guess “it depends on what your definition of is is… “, Bill Clinton.
“they lied about hitting 3ghz with the g5 by june of 2004”
That’s actually called missing a goal, and they weren’t alone in missing goals in that time frame, Intel and AMD did the same thing.
+1. Its also called imlicit vs. explicit. Saying “we should”, “we will probably”, “we hope”, “we anticipate”… means something different from saying “we will”. Also, even if he did use the phrase “we will”, you have to consider other contextual aspects (tone, preceding and following words, phrases, sentences, etc.).
To look at it another way, customers should be able to sue Apple if that was understood to be a definite projection. It seems only a certain minority choose to understand it as such. I will leave it to you to figure out who that is.
“and on and on…”
Why are you so negative about all this?
why? is what I wonder as well…
Peace :-]
MPEG is the industry standards body. AAC is a format made by MPEG. AAC is an industry standard.
BTW D, I notice you did not even bother to respond to my previous response to your previous response.
That’s because you ramble on incessantly and hardly make a damn bit of sense. And besides, your whole rant about Visual Basic was off topic anyway.
But if you go back and look, I did respond to one or two of your remarks.
Do you see how stupid your reasoning is? There is ZERO obligation, I repeat ZERO obligation (legally, morally/ethically – except if you are a monopoly)for a company to make a product that support anothers specs. or abilities.
Look, we’re not talking about supporting somebody else’s format. The other party has done all the work to make their format work on an iPod, and Apple is threatening to block this format from being able to be played in a future software update. Actually making the effort to make somebody else’s format from working on your device and actually preventing that format from working are two entirely different things. So essentially, Apple is telling its customers “Yeah, we know this format already works on your iPod, but we are going to try and stop it from working because we don’t want you to have the option of playing Real’s format.”
So, if your argument was that Apple was limiting their commercial success by this move that would be a debatable, non-nonsensical pespective.
Actually, that’s part of the argument too. The only reason ITMS exists is to push iPods. If iPods can play one more format, it seems that could only help their sales.
I mean, come on. You create/invent something. As part of its definition, you specify what components it will have – after all, remember its is YOUR PRODUCT not the guy down the street – and then develop/manufacture.
If I create a product that serves xyz purpose, it’s not up to me to decide what my customers do with it once they buy it. If I need them to do x with the device in order for me to make a lot of money but they are doing y instead, then that is my problem, not theirs.
add that last bit because there are many people that say product X should have Y yet even if Y++ RELOADED is added they still will not buy it.
True, but they might buy it the product has Y, but certainly will not if it doesn’t.
Apple says it will support any standard it deems needed by their customers when it becomes OPEN and non-RAND.
First of all, we have already established that Apple doesn’t have to support anything. We have also established that competitors cannot use open standards for the same reason Apple doesn’t use open standards on ITMS – the RIAA won’t let them.
Real should have their own marketing department for that not rely on Apples products market theirs.
AFFAIK, Real is not in the hardware market, whereas Apple is. Having Real’s format working on iPod sounds like the perfect marriage to me.
PS: BTW, Apple is not becoming like MS. MS stole and stole and sto…, they deceived, deceived, deceived…, MS lied, lied, lied… MS had/has minimum/base-level user quality focus in order to appeal to bottom line… and so, and so on…
Apple is trying to use their file format to control the market instead of competing on price, functionality, and selection. This is the exact same thing that MS does.
MPEG is the industry standards body. AAC is a format made by MPEG. AAC is an industry standard.
Alright, so assuming you’re right, Apple is using an encrypted, proprietary version of this standard on ITMS, as they are mandated to do so by the RIAA. So if apple isn’t using the standard, why do people expect Real to do so either? ‘Like why doesn’t Real use an industry standard that will work in iPod?’ Answer, they can’t.
“Actually making the effort to make somebody else’s format from working on your device and actually preventing that format from working are two entirely different things.”
should read …
“Actually making the effort to make somebody else’s format work on your device and actually preventing that format from working are two entirely different things.”
“Look, we’re not talking about supporting somebody else’s format. The other party has done all the work to make their format work on an iPod, and Apple is threatening to block this format from being able to be played in a future software update. Actually making the effort to make somebody else’s format from working on your device and actually preventing that format from working are two entirely different things. So essentially, Apple is telling its customers “Yeah, we know this format already works on your iPod, but we are going to try and stop it from working because we don’t want you to have the option of playing Real’s format.””
Did you even read what Apple said about it? They said they can’t promise that it will work in the future. They didn’t say it wouldn’t, or that they were going to do anything to stop it. They said they weren’t going to put up the effort to test it and make sure it worked, they were going to continue doing what they have been whether it works with Reals software or not. If they wanted to stop it they would be going after Real. They aren’t.
“Apple is trying to use their file format to control the market instead of competing on price, functionality, and selection. This is the exact same thing that MS does.”
Price, functionality, and selection. Price is the same as everyone else, also controlled by the record industry. Functionality, if you mean iTMS then it’s more functional than anything else, once you start using it. If you mean the iPod, well, it seems to be competing just fine.
“Alright, so assuming you’re right, Apple is using an encrypted, proprietary version of this standard on ITMS, as they are mandated to do so by the RIAA. So if apple isn’t using the standard, why do people expect Real to do so either? ‘Like why doesn’t Real use an industry standard that will work in iPod?’ Answer, they can’t.”
It’s not if that’s right, it is. AAC is the audio layer of MPEG 4. MPEG 4 is very much a standard, in every sense of the word, and is also about to replace MPEG 2 on DVDs (already announced, and to be completed in the next 2 years). As to why everyone uses the formats they use, it comes down to two things. First, what deals can they cut with the format creators to get the stuff on their hardware. Second, and more importantly, what the record industry tells them to use. Which gets me thinking the record industry is playing like MS here. If they wanted everything compatible it would be. It sounds like they want everyone competing because they win either way. Kind of like how MS screwed over the hardware industry a few years ago. And kind of like what Linux is doing to MS now. Only this time around Jobs is getting kicked out of Apple and thus they are coming out on top.
Apple is NOT using a proprietary form of the standard. they use the AAC standard and then place a proprietary encryption algorithm on the data which can only be decrypted by Quick Time.
the crux of Apple’s argument (which is one I cannot support for political reasons) is that Real has reverse engineered a copy protection system and has begun to redistribute it (that is a definition the court has not made as to what redistribution means in this law) which is a violation of the DMCA.
anyway, if you want to remove the Fairplay encryption, just download Hymn and your done (for windows users at least. on the Mac you need an iPod because of how the encryption systems are set up on each platform.)
“anyway, if you want to remove the Fairplay encryption, just download Hymn and your done (for windows users at least. on the Mac you need an iPod because of how the encryption systems are set up on each platform.)”
iMovie does in on OS X. So does Toast.
Just because the MPEG group says that AAC is an industry standard, doesn’t make it so. And it sure as hell ain’t an open standard. Why? Because I can’t write an AAC encoder without shelling out $20,000 for a license. Not very open in my opinion. This is the same reason why Hollywood went after the kid in Norway for writing DeCSS. It wasn’t because he made it possible to copy DVD’s. It was because he was circumventing something that the DVD Consortium was licensing out for a lot of money.
Its all about the money. I have two Apple computers and an iPod. But I no longer buy from iTMS because I don’t want any music that uses DRM. But I’m really stuck between a rock and a hard place with copying my CD’s onto my computer. Either use MP3 or AAC. Both require licenses and are not open. I’m sticking with AAC but I do wish that iTunes and the iPod support Ogg Vorbis and FLAC. I’m sure Apple is either being pressured or has signed a contract with Dolby not to allow those formats since they would pretty much end anybody’s reason for using AAC. Why pay for a format when you can have a better sounding one, in my opinion, for free.
and open standard is not speaking about a OSS format, it is saying that you can pay money to use the format, see all parts of the format, extend the format and even have a say in the format.
Windows Media is a closed format. if you pay to use it, you can not see all parts of it, you can not extend the format, and you can not have a say in the format.
an OSS format is one where you MAY not HAVE to pay for it (the GPL does not say you cannot make people pay for your software before they get the source.), you can see all parts of it, extend it change it etc. and you MIGHT have a say in it if the project is open to the community.
Well, Jeff, you’re missing a few points here. First, no one said AAC was open, just standard. And it is a standard not because of what the MPEG Group says, but because MPEG has long been a standard. Apple doesn’t use it because of a license with anyone, they use it because MPEG 4 is based on .mov and Apple helped create it. Second, no matter where you buy digital music, you are going to get DRM. iTMS has fairly loose DRM, and it’s usually the principle of the thing that gets people, because you can burn as many times as you want, and if you have more than 5 computers that hold your jukebox then you are way too much of a geek, or have entirely too much music. Or you can just remove the DRM with Toast or iMovie and not lose any quality.
how do you use Toast to remove the DRM? I drag my files on to it and make a disk image and then mount it and the files play no sound.
so what do I have to do?
“and if you have more than 5 computers that hold your jukebox then you are way too much of a geek”
I’ve got two Macs (three if you count the one I use here at work) and have never figured out how to load the songs on more than one computer. When I connect my iPod to the second one it asks me if I want to wipe out the songs and sync with the current computer, which has no songs on it until I sync with the iPod.