PDA

View Full Version : In iTunes War, France Has Met the Enemy. Perhaps It Is Franc...


MacBytes
Apr 27, 2006, 10:34 AM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: Apple Services
Link: In iTunes War, France Has Met the Enemy. Perhaps It Is France. (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20060427113433)
Description:: University of Chicago Business School economist criticizes France for the recent DRM law. Says Apple is not the bad kind of monopolist that stifles competition and then raises prices. Instead, it created a new market through innovation and thus benefits consumers.

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

Stella
Apr 27, 2006, 10:45 AM
What benefits consumers is a universal DRM standard so consumers can buy from whatever music store they like, and play the music on whatever device they like.

No doubt some bright 'genius' will enlighten this forum by saying 'easy - you just burn and rip'... Not the answer, it takes time and degrades quality.

The current DRM mess is anti-consumer.

jaxstate
Apr 27, 2006, 10:48 AM
They didn't create a new market, the just made a easy to use market. The "works with iPod only" DRM is just a bad idea all the way around.

DeathChill
Apr 27, 2006, 10:51 AM
The current DRM mess is anti-consumer.
As are all DRM systems. It makes no sense that I have to pay for music and then I am limited with what I can do with it.

nbs2
Apr 27, 2006, 10:58 AM
The market they created was the integrated system. By developing their own system, the consumer knows what they are getting.

Let me ask this - if iTunes dropped Windows support, and Apple said that the iTunes DRM could only be used on Mac compatible software - what would happen?

Remember antitrust is not designed to benefit the consumer directly - it is there to ensure that competition is possible. That is already the case with the iPod and iTunes (although I would love to see Creative/iRiver/Yahoo music/Napster capitulate and admit that they cannot compete because of Apple's dominance)...And with a luxury good, there is an even more tenuous hold on the consumer harm idea - not having an mp3 player is not a sign of poverty and haivng one is not fundamental to participating in society...

crees!
Apr 27, 2006, 11:24 AM
Before declaring pre-emptive war on iTunes, however, perhaps the French would do best to remember a lesson from 1789. Sometimes the very people calling for revolution are the ones who end up losing their heads.
Yes! Off with their heads! :mad:

DeathChill
Apr 27, 2006, 11:34 AM
Yes! Off with their heads! :mad:
Yes, off with their heads for not allowing Apple or ANYONE to maintain a DRM monopoly. I'm glad that someone passed the law. I am not amused that anyone thinks that I have to pay for something and then still not be allowed to do whatever I want with it.

askthedust
Apr 27, 2006, 11:34 AM
I agree DRM is a pain, but I also like buying albums for 10 bucks already formatted for my ipod. it's what i would do with the cd anyway. right now i buy based on which format is cheaper. I have no use that would exceed what apple's DRM limits me to so I have no real complaints about it. I've had to reset my allowed computers with apple after selling a G4 tower and it was a painless process and done within 24 hours. I would rather be able to buy 10 dollar albums with some minor DRM than keep paying 11.99 to 14.99.....

crees!
Apr 27, 2006, 11:40 AM
Yes, off with their heads for not allowing Apple or ANYONE to maintain a DRM monopoly. I'm glad that someone passed the law. I am not amused that anyone thinks that I have to pay for something and then still not be allowed to do whatever I want with it.
iTMS DRM is not a monopoly. You don't need an iPod to download from the store and you can put your songs on ANY device you want. Sit and think about that one for a second before spouting out more whinage. If you don't like it, don't use it.

Gasu E.
Apr 27, 2006, 11:49 AM
What benefits consumers is a universal DRM standard so consumers can buy from whatever music store they like, and play the music on whatever device they like.

No doubt some bright 'genius' will enlighten this forum by saying 'easy - you just burn and rip'... Not the answer, it takes time and degrades quality.

The current DRM mess is anti-consumer.

A repetition of a tiresome mantra that makes no attempt to respond to the excellent points made in the article. You can do better than this.

DeathChill
Apr 27, 2006, 12:05 PM
iTMS DRM is not a monopoly. You don't need an iPod to download from the store and you can put your songs on ANY device you want. Sit and think about that one for a second before spouting out more whinage. If you don't like it, don't use it.
Uh, the last I heard you CANNOT put any songs you buy from iTunes on anything other then the iPod as Apple refuses to license Fairplay.

This is the problem with people who blindly support anything Apple does; they refuse to see the bad. I bet even Apple doesn't like the DRM, but we KNOW they have to put it in. Even Apple's own documentation advises against the use of DRM.

EDIT: And no, it doesn't count if you burn the bought song and re-rip it as that degrades quality and defeats the whole point. This is not a standard feature and a huge pain for something you've already paid for.

\/\/\/ Is the method I stated above what you're talking about? I sure hope not...

crees!
Apr 27, 2006, 12:06 PM
Uh, the last I heard you CANNOT put any songs you buy from iTunes on anything other then the iPod as Apple refuses to license Fairplay. True, but like I said, think about it because you can, and legally I might add.

Stella
Apr 27, 2006, 12:15 PM
A repetition of a tiresome mantra that makes no attempt to respond to the excellent points made in the article. You can do better than this.

The article is generally lame and overall negative with an Anti French tone. Negativity example:
"If the French gave away the codes, Apple would lose much of its rationale for improving iTunes. Right now, after the royalty payment to the label (around 65 cents) and the processing fee to the credit card company (as high as 23 cents), not to mention other costs, Apple's margin on 99-cent music is thin. Yet it continues to add free features to iTunes because it helps sell iPods."

Actually, no, it will force Apple to keep itself competitive with other stores, so to encourage users to buy from iTMS.

Competition is Good, it *encourages* innovation.

"Even worse, sharing the codes could make it easier for hackers to unravel Apple's FairPlay software. Without strong copy protection, labels would not supply as much new music. Indeed, Apple argues that sharing the codes could make the pirates' job easy enough to wipe out the legal market. Agitators might claim that this is the very goal of the French bill: why else would it also reduce the maximum fine for consumers caught illegally downloading music from 300,000 euros (about $371,000) to just 38 euros (less than $47)?"

Again, negative statement. Fairplay has already been hacked. Whats the difference? Hackers will always find ways around the protection - and since iTMS and fairplay is dominant - it will receive the most attention from hackers. At the end of the day - no difference between now and a unified DRM method.

As long as record labels see that there is a lot of profit ( and potential future profit ) with online stores, they aren't about to pull their content. If they did so, they will be in the same position as 3 years ago - a lot of online piracy.

backupdrummer
Apr 27, 2006, 12:43 PM
Where do you download iTunes songs to? Anyone? Anyone? Your computer. Fairplay is compatible with any modern computer running either OSX or Windows. Once you have purchased a song the consumer has many choices for what they do with thier music, mix playlists, burn cds, use them as iMovie soundtracks, etc. Oh yeah and if they would like transfer them to an Apple iPod.

I think this will end up being the flaw in anyones arguement about opening up Fairplay. I have agreed to download to my computer not directly to my iPod. On the computer side i can move all around from pc to mac with out a hitch. This was a gray area when the store only sold music but as the video biz has taken off I think it shores up that Apple has 2 businesses: selling people content for thier computers and making various content available on the go with the iPod. They are not using anticompetetive tactics for either of those 2 separate businesses.

I find it a strech to say that to say that the 2 businesses that are not anticompetitive when put together are anticompetative since neither necessitate the other.

I think it would be a good business move for Apple to open up Fairplay so that the other music stores can be used to sell music that is able to be played on an iPod. I think it makes strong business sense. Apple currently does not give a rates behind what about my opinions on how htey should run things. Case in point, .Mac should be bundled with iLife and the whole package sold annually for $140.

briansolomon
Apr 27, 2006, 12:46 PM
What is this? France isn't backing down from a war! This is news in itself

Ugg
Apr 27, 2006, 12:54 PM
Uh, the last I heard you CANNOT put any songs you buy from iTunes on anything other then the iPod as Apple refuses to license Fairplay.

This is the problem with people who blindly support anything Apple does; they refuse to see the bad. I bet even Apple doesn't like the DRM, but we KNOW they have to put it in. Even Apple's own documentation advises against the use of DRM.

EDIT: And no, it doesn't count if you burn the bought song and re-rip it as that degrades quality and defeats the whole point. This is not a standard feature and a huge pain for something you've already paid for.

\/\/\/ Is the method I stated above what you're talking about? I sure hope not...

I don't know why people keep spouting this bs. All you have to do is burn the music to a cd as mp3 and then import it to WHATEVER device your tiny little heart desires. Admittedly, it takes an extra step but you MOST CERTAINLY CAN do this.

Once again, it's not Apple that insists upon the DRM, it's the music companies. They did not want the music to play on anything other than the iPod. When the iTMS came out, iPods were Mac only, this allowed the record companies to experiement in a narrow niche market. Don't blame Apple, blame the labels.

Sure, the playing field and mindset has changed, but I sure don't hear the labels clamoring for relaxed DRM.

There will come a day when Apple and the labels are forced to change, that day, however, has not yet arrived and I figure it'll be another 2 to 3 years before it does.

backupdrummer
Apr 27, 2006, 12:58 PM
Again, negative statement. Fairplay has already been hacked. Whats the difference?

I don't believe that Fairplay has been hacked (sans the often stated burn rip method). A while back DVDJohn hacked iTunes so that it denied the music store from wrapping a Music store song in the DRM upon the initial download.

Hackers will always find ways around the protection - and since iTMS and fairplay is dominant - it will receive the most attention from hackers. At the end of the day - no difference between now and a unified DRM method.

That is a pretty silly thing to say, There is a world of difference between hackers in the shadows breaking layers of protection so they can listen to Kelly Clarkson on what ever portable player they want and a Corporation such as Apple licensing and supporting other companies to use thier DRM device.

DeathChill
Apr 27, 2006, 01:43 PM
I don't know why people keep spouting this bs. All you have to do is burn the music to a cd as mp3 and then import it to WHATEVER device your tiny little heart desires. Admittedly, it takes an extra step but you MOST CERTAINLY CAN do this.

Once again, it's not Apple that insists upon the DRM, it's the music companies. They did not want the music to play on anything other than the iPod. When the iTMS came out, iPods were Mac only, this allowed the record companies to experiement in a narrow niche market. Don't blame Apple, blame the labels.

Sure, the playing field and mindset has changed, but I sure don't hear the labels clamoring for relaxed DRM.

There will come a day when Apple and the labels are forced to change, that day, however, has not yet arrived and I figure it'll be another 2 to 3 years before it does.
I 100% agree that it's the labels that enforce the use of DRM, but that doesn't really change the fact that the lack of a universal DRM standard really makes using music between different devices a pain.

As well, it's NOT BS that you can't put it on another device right after downloading it from iTunes. You can't, you have to strip the DRM from the MP3 first. I don't understand how anyone can consider that a normal step to take. You paid for it and you STILL have to spend time so that you can use it normally. The law is supposed to eliminate this step as it will allow companies to make their devices read all types of DRM'd music.

Stella
Apr 27, 2006, 01:59 PM
It has been hacked, I think you should look further.


I don't believe that Fairplay has been hacked (sans the often stated burn rip method). A while back DVDJohn hacked iTunes so that it denied the music store from wrapping a Music store song in the DRM upon the initial download.



That is a pretty silly thing to say, There is a world of difference between hackers in the shadows breaking layers of protection so they can listen to Kelly Clarkson on what ever portable player they want and a Corporation such as Apple licensing and supporting other companies to use thier DRM device.


Once again the Apple apologists come out in force to defend Apple.

I'm not surprised, since this is an Apple related site.

It should be able to go to another online music store and be able to play music on my Mac and on my iPod, unfortunately this is not possible. You can burn -> rip, but not using a Mac ( using other DRM methods other than Fairplay ). Once again, this takes *time*, and process that no one should have to go through. A standard DRM format would remove these problems.

Overall, that article was pretty damned lame, one sided bias.

wedge antilies
Apr 27, 2006, 02:17 PM
What is this? France isn't backing down from a war! This is news in itself

I could take you seriously if only your history lessons weren't based on Leno monologues....:rolleyes:

tk421
Apr 27, 2006, 03:45 PM
As well, it's NOT BS that you can't put it on another device right after downloading it from iTunes. You can't, you have to strip the DRM from the MP3 first. I don't understand how anyone can consider that a normal step to take. You paid for it and you STILL have to spend time so that you can use it normally. The law is supposed to eliminate this step as it will allow companies to make their devices read all types of DRM'd music.

You know what else bugs me? I pay good money for a CD and I have to open the package, put the CD in my computer, and then WAIT for the songs to be converted! This sometimes takes several minutes! But that's not all. Sometimes, there are errors in the tags!! I have to correct this myself. Then, get this, I have to run an applescript if I want to get the album art. Finally, those jerks at the RIAA actually make me plug in my iPod for the song to transfer!! This outrages me! If I pay for a CD, I should have the music on my iPod without all this extra effort!

Photorun
Apr 27, 2006, 03:49 PM
It has been hacked, I think you should look further.

Once again the Apple apologists come out in force to defend Apple.

I'm not surprised, since this is an Apple related site.

It should be able to go to another online music store and be able to play music on my Mac and on my iPod, unfortunately this is not possible. You can burn -> rip, but not using a Mac ( using other DRM methods other than Fairplay ). Once again, this takes *time*, and process that no one should have to go through. A standard DRM format would remove these problems.

Overall, that article was pretty damned lame, one sided bias.

Nice backpeddle with a "well, the article is lame," nice, you didn't hurt your mantra, it's easy to not listen when you keep plugging your ears.

What's missed is Microsuck has DRM but you keep whining that only Apple should open up their DRM. Again it's the old double startard, because Apple innovates and makes best they have to suffer, idiots like M$ can go free with impunity. If you were really not being so disingenuous there Stella you'd point out EVERYONE should open up their DRM, if not, then NOBODY should open up their DRM. It's all or nothing, not just Apple.

And last time I checked you can go buy another player or download from another service, Apple has the market perhaps on the BEST player and the BEST music store but their others. Should XM play Sirius satellite stations or HBO carry Cinemax programming or XSux play Playstation games? Don't like iTMS? Great, go somewhere else or buy a peecee, but stop your damn whining, you sound vaguely... uhhh, French.

Stella
Apr 27, 2006, 04:15 PM
I have set out reasons to why I think the article is lame... I don't know what you are trying to say?!!!!

Do you know what 'standard' means?

Obviously, I assumed too much when I'm talking about a 'Standard DRM' / 'universal DRM standard' I wouldn't have to explicity mention all other DRM providers because this 'standard' DRM would apply throughout, not just Apple.

But hey, I'm expecting too much...


What's missed is Microsuck has DRM but you keep whiniang that only Apple should open up their DRM.
<snip rest of ********>

FreeState
Apr 27, 2006, 04:16 PM
IAs well, it's NOT BS that you can't put it on another device right after downloading it from iTunes. You can't, you have to strip the DRM from the MP3 first. I don't understand how anyone can consider that a normal step to take. You paid for it and you STILL have to spend time so that you can use it normally. The law is supposed to eliminate this step as it will allow companies to make their devices read all types of DRM'd music.

Im upset I cant just put my records, cassette tapes and cds on my iPod automatically. Why can't I just put them on my iPod and simple they play-
Oh I get it what you buy from iTunes is not a recored, cassette tape, cd etc... its an Apple AAC file. Im sure thats how a court of law would look at it too.

DeathChill
Apr 27, 2006, 06:11 PM
You know what else bugs me? I pay good money for a CD and I have to open the package, put the CD in my computer, and then WAIT for the songs to be converted! This sometimes takes several minutes! But that's not all. Sometimes, there are errors in the tags!! I have to correct this myself. Then, get this, I have to run an applescript if I want to get the album art. Finally, those jerks at the RIAA actually make me plug in my iPod for the song to transfer!! This outrages me! If I pay for a CD, I should have the music on my iPod without all this extra effort!
Wow, way to go the completely wrong way. You are buying the songs on a COMPLETELY different medium. When you buy an iTunes song you're buying a digital copy of song which, like any normal digital copy, should be able to be played on any machine or device without any extra work.

It's not acceptable that I have to do extra work just to make something I bought a digital copy of work with more then proprietary software. It's acceptable that CD's don't transfer to the computer using your mind, it's acceptable that your iPod doesn't get up and plug itself in and transfer the songs by itself, and it's acceptable that other physical formats require you to transfer them yourself. The advantage of the digital media is that you can do anything with it right off the bat.

EDIT: Why does everyone think that this French law only applies to Apple? It applies to EVERY music provider that uses DRM that sells music in France.

AlmostThere
Apr 27, 2006, 06:59 PM
Since then, iTunes has sold more than one billion songs. Its success comes largely from two crucial innovations...

... features to iTunes because it helps sell iPods.

Can anyone actually back up these assumptions? I see these "facts" stated so often but have never seen any figures to back them, for example, what percentage of iTMS accounts were created before an iPod was purchased, or how many iTMS accounts are opened without an associated iPod?

The iPod is a fantastic music player but I cannot shake this feeling that the only reason iTMS is so popular is because of the iPod. iTMS is the Internet Explorer of online music stores - its popularity is based on the fact that it is bundled with the world's most popular mp3 player / operating system.

macnulty
Apr 27, 2006, 08:28 PM
Yes, off with their heads for not allowing Apple or ANYONE to maintain a DRM monopoly. I'm glad that someone passed the law. I am not amused that anyone thinks that I have to pay for something and then still not be allowed to do whatever I want with it.

Like scalping?:D

macnulty
Apr 27, 2006, 08:34 PM
What benefits consumers is a universal DRM standard so consumers can buy from whatever music store they like, and play the music on whatever device they like.

No doubt some bright 'genius' will enlighten this forum by saying 'easy - you just burn and rip'... Not the answer, it takes time and degrades quality.

The current DRM mess is anti-consumer.

Everybody knows the deal when they buy an iPod, don't like it, don't buy it.

DeathChill
Apr 27, 2006, 09:09 PM
Like scalping?:D
Sure, if you want. I think it's wrong but who the hell am I to stop you from doing what you want.

tk421
Apr 27, 2006, 10:41 PM
Wow, way to go the completely wrong way. You are buying the songs on a COMPLETELY different medium. When you buy an iTunes song you're buying a digital copy of song which, like any normal digital copy, should be able to be played on any machine or device without any extra work.

It's not acceptable that I have to do extra work just to make something I bought a digital copy of work with more then proprietary software. It's acceptable that CD's don't transfer to the computer using your mind, it's acceptable that your iPod doesn't get up and plug itself in and transfer the songs by itself, and it's acceptable that other physical formats require you to transfer them yourself. The advantage of the digital media is that you can do anything with it right off the bat.

EDIT: Why does everyone think that this French law only applies to Apple? It applies to EVERY music provider that uses DRM that sells music in France.

Wow. You must live in a different digital world than the rest of us. When I bought Photoshop, it only ran on a Mac, not a PC. When I bought Super Smash Bros, it didn't play on a Playstation. And guess what? CD's are digital copies! The original audio was recorded on some other medium and probably mastered to magnetic tape.

That goes for downloads, too. It cost $300 dollars to download an After Effects plugin that will not work with Final Cut Pro, Motion, Shake, or anything else. If you don't like the terms, don't buy. There's always emusic.com. They are a good service and don't have any DRM. If you have an iPod or a WMA player, there are plenty of options for you either way.

vansouza
Apr 28, 2006, 12:53 AM
I got an iPod at Christmas and a iMM a few weeks ago, so very new to the world of Apple. On the PC side of life I could use RealNetworks to download and sync to my iPod; with out a hitch. So iTunes does not have a monopoly on the winXP side of life. 2 cents...

applebum
Apr 28, 2006, 01:00 AM
It should be able to go to another online music store and be able to play music on my Mac and on my iPod, unfortunately this is not possible. ... A standard DRM format would remove these problems.


Stella - here is the problem with your logic - a universal DRM will not allow you to go to another store and play the music on your Mac and iPod!!! Let's say some legislation does force Apple to license fairplay - tell me which other store you will go to from your Mac to buy music - (sound of silence and crickets) - oh yeah, there is no other store that allows music to be bought from the Mac platform. Simply creating a universal DRM will not force these other companies to make their music stores available to the Mac platform. And if you don't want to do the extra step of burning to CD and then re-importing, then I don't want to do the extra step of firing up Boot Camp or Parallels just to buy the music in the first place. See, a universal DRM does not benefit all consumers, just those with a MS PC. And I don't think Apple should be forced to do something that only benefits Microsoft.

(Now, if all the music stores will be forced to run on ALL platforms, then I am for a universal DRM)

applebum
Apr 28, 2006, 01:13 AM
Can anyone actually back up these assumptions? I see these "facts" stated so often but have never seen any figures to back them, for example, what percentage of iTMS accounts were created before an iPod was purchased, or how many iTMS accounts are opened without an associated iPod?

The iPod is a fantastic music player but I cannot shake this feeling that the only reason iTMS is so popular is because of the iPod. iTMS is the Internet Explorer of online music stores - its popularity is based on the fact that it is bundled with the world's most popular mp3 player / operating system.
Umm - I can. I bought music from iTunes long before I had an iPod. I bought the iPod because I needed somewhere to put the songs I bought from iTunes and I didn't want to burn CDs. My mother bought a lot of music from iTunes long before I gave her a Shuffle. My sister and my niece were the same way - had music on their computers before they bought iPods. My father still doesn't have any iPod, but continues to buy music from iTunes. His iMac is his stereo system. I have a friend who uses Windows and has no iPod, but, you guessed it, he does buy music from iTunes. I cannot shake the feeling that this has not only happened to me but millions of others.

eric67
Apr 28, 2006, 03:52 AM
EDIT: Why does everyone think that this French law only applies to Apple? It applies to EVERY music provider that uses DRM that sells music in France.
you are right!!
I am a mac user, I am part of a well-known Mac-dedicated website (also available in English), and I am frankly tired of reading such crappy articles about French DADVSI bill written by some "pretending" experts from the other side of the Atlantic. A recent article from a BBC reporter was far better than this NYT
- First, as usual, they all look at Apple...well the leader for sure, but the bill will also be valid for Microsoft, as for Sony :rolleyes: , so please the Mac maniacs/geeks stop complaining that it is an anti-Apple campaign. It is not.
- yes, the specific article in the bill related to opened DRM is part of a law proposal intending to protect consumers for the internet business/shopping. Of course the goal is far to be achieved, and you will find better articles describing the proposal (written in English by French citizen, at least knowing what they are talking about: www.hardmac.com search news with "DADVSI" as keyword).
- again this bill is not anti-Apple, but rather pro-Music Majors, and especially supporting the largest one, Universal Music, owned by the French group Vivendi Universal. Of course there is a weird link between a first chamber representative being the wife of Vivendi Universal CEO...
- it is still a bill, it is not fully voted yet, and it is not applied yet.
- and plenty of other details...

In summary, please do not believe or consider as entirely true what can be written by US newspaper especially when it deals with events taking place in other countries, even if it is related to US company business.
the NYT article is simplistic, narrow and short-minded, while with more information or documents, it might have been a good analysis of the current situation

AlmostThere
Apr 28, 2006, 04:34 AM
Umm - I can. I bought music from iTunes long before I had an iPod.

Thanks ... but, um, that's an anecdote. Those 6 are obviously important to you but I hope you understand my reluctance to extrapolate that to a population of 20-odd million :).

These debates about iTMS come up so often here and there are plenty of assumptions made hence I was wondering if anything concrete, by which I mean something 'hard' like sales figures or failing that, something 'soft' like a consumer survey, exists. I haven't found anything yet. This article tries to make some reasoned arguments but is just another unsubstantiated opinion, which I find a touch frustrating. As it says In their fervor to free listeners from the shackles of their iPods, French politicians have abandoned one of the guiding principles of antitrust economics: penalize companies that harm consumers, not the ones that succeed by building better products.
I am certainly not going to argue with an economics professor on a point of principal, but the idea that iTMS is a 'better product' is a central tenet that is unverified and I think needs more than anecdote to validate considering the level at which the author writes.

Stella
Apr 28, 2006, 10:12 AM
(Now, if all the music stores will be forced to run on ALL platforms, then I am for a universal DRM)

Yes, *absolutely* any standard DRM should be applied to multiple platforms.

Imagine - Universal DRM Standard where:

1 - microsoft would implement it for windows
2 - Apple would implement it for OSX
3 - Geeks develop a version of Linux

* developed under some license to ensure good implementation as per spec and verified.

It still baffles me to why people make a distinction between *music* CDs and digital formats ( i.e., MP3, MP4 etc ).. they are the same, just different media. They shouldn't be treated so differently as they are today. As the above poster argues - cites software as an example - you can't run playstation games on a 360, for example. But software is a different industry. By the way, the platform dependence is slowly ending, with the web and platform independant languages such as Java etc.

I would imagine in say 20 years time you will choose your OS and still be able to run your existing software. More, I would go as far to say, in 20 years time, we would not have an OS as we do today. The "OS" wars will have been finished and be no longer an issue, it will all be web applications or something similar, or exclusive use of platform independent languages.

DeathChill
Apr 28, 2006, 10:19 AM
Wow. You must live in a different digital world than the rest of us. When I bought Photoshop, it only ran on a Mac, not a PC. When I bought Super Smash Bros, it didn't play on a Playstation. And guess what? CD's are digital copies! The original audio was recorded on some other medium and probably mastered to magnetic tape.

That goes for downloads, too. It cost $300 dollars to download an After Effects plugin that will not work with Final Cut Pro, Motion, Shake, or anything else. If you don't like the terms, don't buy. There's always emusic.com. They are a good service and don't have any DRM. If you have an iPod or a WMA player, there are plenty of options for you either way.
Yes, but can a Mac run Windows executables? No. Can a PC and a Mac both play back the standard MP3 file? Yes! You're comparing two completely different things. One requires a completely different set of code and work from the company while the other does not. It's acceptable to figure that something not programmed to be run on more then one platform doesn't work on any other, however, MP3's work on all platforms.

You're paying for a specific type of download that is for a specific application and I know that a plug-in for photoshop won't work with anything else. However, I don't recall the last time Apple was the inventor of digital music nor were they the only ones selling it.

I don't know what you're arguing about, you can't possibly think DRM is a good idea. DRM is there to restrict what you, the licensed user, can do with YOUR music. Even Apple doesn't like it.