RealNetworks Slashes Song Prices [Archive]

MacRumors

Aug 17, 2004, 09:53 AM

gjg554

Aug 17, 2004, 09:55 AM

Damn those Real people. I hope they go out of business. Don't mess with Apple.

Arcady

Aug 17, 2004, 09:56 AM

49 cents won't seem like much of a bargain when Apple updates the iPod to break all songs from Real's site...

wrldwzrd89

Aug 17, 2004, 09:57 AM

RealNetworks (http://news.com.com/RealNetworks+slashes+song+prices/2100-1027_3-5312143.html) is set to kick off a high-profile digital music marketing campaign, highlighting the new iPod-compatible technology that has swung the company into conflict with Apple Computer. For a limited time, RealNetworks will offer song downloads from its music store for 49 cents, along with half-price albums. The campaign is the second wave of publicity around the company's Harmony (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/07/20040725235143.shtml) technology, which effectively recreated a version of Apple's proprietary copy-protection technology without Apple's permission. That has allowed RealNetworks to be the first non-Apple store that can distribute songs directly compatible with the iPod music player, despite strong protests (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/07/20040729100534.shtml) from Apple itself.
How can RealNetworks afford to charge so little for song downloads? Surely they're taking a loss on this marketing promotion? Also, there's the Apple factor - how will Apple react to this news (both in their music store and regarding FairPlay itself)? I don't see how this will help Real, unless it means that their customer count more than doubles because of it - which I think is unlikely.

caveman_uk

Aug 17, 2004, 09:57 AM

Hmmmm....desperate?????

jaison13

Aug 17, 2004, 09:57 AM

if there is no real legal action apple can take, then i guess it's bad for apple but great for consumers because a price war will be around the corner.

FriarTuck

Aug 17, 2004, 09:58 AM

49 cents won't seem like much of a bargain when Apple updates the iPod to break all songs from Real's site...

Really... if there's any uncertainty as to whether the song is going to work for people or not going into the future, the incentive to pay for it rather than stealing it is minimal.

This gets them a day of pub and then disappears into the failed scheme file.

Motha-Canuker

Aug 17, 2004, 09:59 AM

Dream Scenerio:

1. Real breaks iPod protection (done)
2. Real cuts prices of thier store (done)
3. Apple follows suit with iTMS
4. Real rolls over and dies
5. Rob Glasser gets a combination of herpes infected hemroids

Mudbug

Aug 17, 2004, 10:01 AM

49 cents won't seem like much of a bargain when Apple updates the iPod to break all songs from Real's site...

but at the same time you're expecting everyone that has an iPod to run the updater that would kill their Real connectivity. I think this will take a bite out of Apple. Maybe not a huge bite, but it'll still sting a bit. Besides, the publicity they've garnered from this has been more helpful to Real than really anything else in recent years.

Something to remember - there is no such thing as bad publicity. Just publicity. Real's name has gotten out there and been made known as a place to get iPod compatible stuff. And they're marketing themselves as such. Apple would have done better to quietly squelch the operability of Harmony and walk away, than to make a publicity battle out of it.

Chappers

Aug 17, 2004, 10:01 AM

Littleodie914

Aug 17, 2004, 10:04 AM

This is just a shame. RealNetworks is only doing this to try and miff Apple... Won't work, however, as I don't believe there's a whole lot of people that even use RealNetwork's music service. :rolleyes: Oh well, with all the money they'll lose, it'll be nice to have these guys out of the way! :p

Wigletbill

Aug 17, 2004, 10:05 AM

Man, talk about a backfire. And to think they set it up as a .org. What lameness... what super lameness. Their petition is owned by people telling them to go shove it. =)

Trekkie

Aug 17, 2004, 10:05 AM

Just because it's a cheap turd doesn't make it any more desirable.

iJon

Aug 17, 2004, 10:10 AM

do we even know if apple will file a suit against real. im sure real's legal team checked before they went into this whole mess, but i could be wrong.

iJon

Chaszmyr

Aug 17, 2004, 10:11 AM

Real is really starting to piss me off. Their products have sucked for years and now they aren't doing anything but annoying Apple like a fly on a horse's ass.

sfhc21

Aug 17, 2004, 10:11 AM

Good for Real! Lower prices are good for the customer! I hope they do well, and then hopefully force Apple to lower their prices. Thats a fat chance, but I like to dream...

shen

Aug 17, 2004, 10:15 AM

Something to remember - there is no such thing as bad publicity. Just publicity.

seriously, you buy that? when you read articles like the ones about XP SP2 and how it breaks apps like office and how it only took MS a year longer than it should have to make a service pack that should never have been needed, you feel the simple fact that the name of the company is repeated several times, is somehow good for them? seriously?

....and i thought that I had a cynical view of the average user!

Java

Aug 17, 2004, 10:16 AM

At http://www.freedomofmusicchoice.org/ you can see and sign Reals petition. Somehow though having read a few of the comments, I don't ever see them sending it to Apple.

Good luck Real - you are sure gonna need it with this petition.
Ooh. That was good for a laugh. i "signed" the petition just like a lot of other people did. Thanks for the update. :)

micvog

Aug 17, 2004, 10:16 AM

The first item listed on their "Freedom of Music Choice" website is:

DON'T BREAK MY IPOD
“Don’t Let Apple Break Your iPod!” Sign up*and tell the Apple you want the right to choose where you get your music.

I think just knowing that there is this possibility will stop 90%+ of people from proceeding further because most people I talk to (1) don't know Real now offers songs they claim will play on the iPod, and (2) don't know that Apple will probably break their compatability at the most opportune moment. Why is Real advertising that? (Besides the obvious answer that they are stupid.)

If I just knew how to launch a DOS attack... www.real.com would be my first choice.

;)

gensor

Aug 17, 2004, 10:17 AM

http://www.petitiononline.com/cgi-bin/suggestion.cgi?r4apple/petition.html

Where is the freedom of choice. If I have Mac and OSX how can I use Real?

krohde

Aug 17, 2004, 10:19 AM

I might have a different opinion to most of you, but I think it is in everyone's favour to open up the iPod to let other music play on the player. I think most people are literally pissed off about the way that REAL has been going about this issue, but sometimes the ends justify the means. Apple and Real are just as much about politics as they are business and I think most people are forgetting that.

I also agree that REAL sucks on the mac, but I have been using it a lot on windows and there it is working just dandy. I love the fast playback, e.g. RollingStone.com's videos and I really dislike Quicktime trailers and music videos in iTunes because the take so long before they start. It's not only my connection (i'm on 768/128), but I am willing to forego minor quality if the music and video starts to play as quick as possible, and REAL has nailed that. It's tough love for Apple, but probably even harder for the Mac evangelists - me included.

Laslo Panaflex

Aug 17, 2004, 10:19 AM

Here are my 2 cents.

1. If Real offers iPod compatable songs, won't that just sell more iPods?, that's where the most money for Apple comes from, in their music venture anyway.

2. Dispite what most people think, illegal donwloading of music is still the way to go for most, so in this case, only Apple wins becuase nobody would buy a shoddy POS MP3 player, they would buy an iPod.

That's just what I think.

garybUK

Aug 17, 2004, 10:20 AM

micvog

Aug 17, 2004, 10:21 AM

I just signed Real's petition... #263. F Real.

(As Chappers pointed out, this actually seeems to be a petition for Real to go out of business.)

padrino121

Aug 17, 2004, 10:23 AM

At http://www.freedomofmusicchoice.org/ you can see and sign Reals petition. Somehow though having read a few of the comments, I don't ever see them sending it to Apple.

Good luck Real - you are sure gonna need it with this petition.

Actually I think the petition shows how pathetic Apple zealots can be.

If this were Apple doing the very same thing to another competitor who had a lock on the market you would all be behind Apple cheering. Another win for the "little guy" as everyone says. It really stings when it's turned around on Apple.

I've used, administered, developed on OSX, BSD, Linux, Solaris, and Windows and have had experience will the zealots of each platform. It's amazing how all of the Apple zealots sound just like the Windows ones you trash all of the time. In the end you are all alike, just behind what each considers a winning solution.

Wonder Boy

Aug 17, 2004, 10:23 AM

Good for Real! Lower prices are good for the customer! I hope they do well, and then hopefully force Apple to lower their prices. Thats a fat chance, but I like to dream...

cheaper prices? if someone can't afford a dollar a song or 9.99 for a cd then they shouldn't be wasting $ on music.

sinisterdesign

Aug 17, 2004, 10:24 AM

I don't see how this will help Real, unless it means that their customer count more than doubles because of it - which I think is unlikely.

oh no! then they'll have 8 customers! :D

yeah, rat bastards. not only are they taking an obvious loss to hype up their site, but they've built this BS "grassroots" 'free your music' campaign.

instead of innovating and coming up w/ a great products of their own, they've chosen to spend their time leeching off the popularity and undermining the security of Apple's products.

if they're actually taking a hit on each song sold w/ the hopes of sustained sales later, i hope a ton of people take advantage of the 1/2 off sale. then i'll laugh when we watch Apple seal that hole and all those customers swamp Real w/ irate emails when their music no longer works. :mad:

redAPPLE

Aug 17, 2004, 10:24 AM

Good for Real! Lower prices are good for the customer! I hope they do well, and then hopefully force Apple to lower their prices. Thats a fat chance, but I like to dream...

if i am correct, it was not Apple's idea to price the songs as they are now. for Apple to lower their prices, the music companies must allow the reduction. Apple only wants to sell iPods. to sell iPods they need a medium where people can easily download music legally (iTMS) and encourage people to buy an iPod. i think, if there was a music store, which was easy to use and uses aac, then Apple would have partnered with them.

wrldwzrd89

Aug 17, 2004, 10:24 AM

I hope apple increase the quality to 192kbps I don't/wouldn't mind keep carrying on paying 79p for 192kbps songs.

You just don't get the slickness of how itms is integrated into iTunes and then with iPod on Real's service though do you?

I don't think the quality's going up anytime soon - Apple's agreements with the muic labels will see to that. Plus, any increase in quality will make the music store less accessible to dial-up users...didn't consider that, now, did you?

Loge

Aug 17, 2004, 10:26 AM

limited period = till we go bankrupt

cr2sh

Aug 17, 2004, 10:28 AM

There's a good number of people who consider any software by real a kind of virus. I'm speaking only from past experience, but I regret every installation I've ever done of that software.

What makes them think I'm going to buy music from a company like that, cuz it costs fifty cents less. :confused:

salmon

Aug 17, 2004, 10:29 AM

Someone explain to me why everyone thinks Real is evil for doing this? To me, anything that gives ME more control over MY music is a good thing. I personally won't go give into a DRM format until it is open and free (as in freedom).

Proprietary formats SUCK for the customer. That's one of the biggest beefs against Microsoft. Real's products suck, that's not in dispute. But having Apple keep its format closed is a terrible thing for us, the consumer, and I'm confused by the support of it I see on these forums.

Frisco

Aug 17, 2004, 10:32 AM

The Man

Aug 17, 2004, 10:33 AM

As long as I can remember, Real makes very lousy software. Real player for Mac sucks and their streaming technology also sucks. (I don't know how Real does on a PC. Oh yeah, Windows Media Format streaming also sucks.) I mean, if I want to see a Real video on the net, it is always buffering... and buffering... plays the video for a while and suddenly stops streaming half way. Windows Media does this also. I have never ever had any real problems with QuickTime. It always seems to run really smooth.

Anyway, the idea of choice isn't bad, but Real hasn't done anything for consumers in the past years. If they want to portray themselves as saints, then they should give us (PC and Mac users) something that will change our world. For now, all that Real brings is crap. This is why so many people dislike Real. Why aren't there more companies out there that don't make crap?

So, my point is:

Freedom of choice=good
No DRM=better
Real=crap

wrldwzrd89

Aug 17, 2004, 10:34 AM

Stupid question, but how does one even download a song from Real. RealOne, Real Player? Not that I would ever want to, but I am just saying if I wanted to I wouldn't even know where to look.

Simplicity :confused:
Frisco-

My best guess is that it's buried somewhere on Real's web site, just like all the other music services out there, instead of being integrated into the player like Apple's music service. The truth is that I don't know either :confused:

suzerain

Aug 17, 2004, 10:36 AM

People seem to forget their agenda. I dunno...I am a music consumer. Therefore, my agenda is: I want to pay the least possible amount to get the most possible return. Therefore, anything that gets the price of music as close to free as possible is, to me, a good thing.

True musicians are going to continue making music, regardless of how much they get from download sales. They'll make their money from live shows, and if they were smart, they'd make money from streaming live shows, too.

All the **** on the iTMS should be considered advertising for their shows. The bands that are going to complain about low prices for CDs and downloads are the corporate shills like BritneyCo., Metallica Inc. and U2 LLC, and so on and so forth, because only the million sellers make money with prerecorded music, anyway.

So, good for Real...let's get some competition in this market, and open up DRM standards. We can't let Apple screw this one up, and end up losing the market to Microsoft DRM, as they did with operating systems. They should have learned by now that ubiquity is a good thing.

(And that comes from a guy who LOVES Apple's products.)

sinisterdesign

Aug 17, 2004, 10:39 AM

Actually I think the petition shows how pathetic Apple zealots can be.

i checked out the site, but didn't bother reading the petition "signatures". wow, somehow i don't think that was the response Real was hoping for. maybe they should have a moderator weeding out (both) the supportive signatures. right now it's just a Real-bashing board.

and btw, i don't know about the term "pathetic". we're oftentimes overzealous (we are "zealots", no doubt), but not pitiful or hopeless. Apple users think Windows is crap and Linux users are geeks, Linux users think Windows is crap and Apple users are loony and Windows user just use what they're given. it's all just a bunch of software in the end (some is just better writen).

actually, i stand corrected. "pathetic" is defined "1. Expressing or showing anger; passionate.", so i guess you are correct. there are a LOT of pathetic Apple zealots on that site...

suzerain

Aug 17, 2004, 10:39 AM

Frisco-

My best guess is that it's buried somewhere on Real's web site, just like all the other music services out there, instead of being integrated into the player like Apple's music service. The truth is that I don't know either :confused:

musicstore.real.com (http://musicstore.real.com)

I believe it is only built into the Windows version of the software.

Interestingly, they are selling 192 kbps AAC tracks, rather than 128kbps. I think that is a good thing.

rlarose

Aug 17, 2004, 10:39 AM

Here is the (tongue-in-cheek) response I posted on my site (http://think-code.com/think-discussions/viewtopic.php?t=2878) this morning to this:

I would genuinely appreciate it if the executives at Real would gently get off this trend of attempting to slam Apple (http://www.freedomofmusicchoice.org) and do something more useful; like being jailed for hacking Apple’s FairPlay DRM (http://think-code.com/think-discussions/viewtopic.php?t=2646c). Isn’t the US firmly bent on jailing little asshat teens for cracking DVD and other ineffective copy protection schemes? It seems like every other week some pimple-faced geek is tossed in the slammer for this sort of thing. So why are the Real decision-makers (the ones who made the command decision to crack the iPod code) not in jail being ass-reamed by “Bubba the pedophile”?

Makes you think…

Not really, but anyhow. Real somehow has gotten away with cracking iPod’s DRM so Mac users around the world will instantly begin downloading an insane amount of music from the Real Networks rather than from iTMS. The technology is called “Harmony” and is really just a mind-boggling giant illegal hack that reaks of Microsoft fingers. I don’t know how this is lawfully possible, but they did it and now promote the hell out of it on their websites. Real claims they cracked the DRM through 'public knowledge' and this is just innovation. Yeah yeah, M$ makes that claim all the time too. It causes Cheerios to launch violently from my nose with laughter.

So now, you must be as tempted as Oprah in front of 20 gallons of ice cream on a hot summer’s day to point your Mac over to their website and get some music for just $0.49 (well for this week)? Oh, but you say that if you go to the Real website (http://www.real.com) and try to get to the music store on your Mac it says, “Bugger off, you’re on a Mac”? Hmm… imagine that. They didn’t think this whole thing out too good, did they? I guess in order to get the “Freedom of Choice” for your APPLE iPOD, you also have to purchase a PC. I say it again, asshats. They make my ass twitch almost as much as the Evil Empire (http://www.microsoft.com).

Speaking of “Freedom of Choice,” have you seen this real piece of **** website (http://www.freedomofmusicchoice.org/)? First of all, half the links don’t work. Secondly, the interface is inferior to something my kid barfed up last night on the living room rug. Next, it gives inaccurate claims that many Mac users have refuted. Finally, it’s just childish. And their mothers’ wear army boots.

Quite understandably, Apple is as stunned (http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?NewsID=9288) as someone waking up with their head stapled to the carpet. I am hoping that in retaliation they put out an iPod update that breaks the Harmony DRM hack. Something deliberate that will format the iPods hard drive with 1’s and 0’s for being a traitor to the cause. You should lose your license to being a Mac user if you download one song from that communist site. Yes, Real Networks is a secret Nazi organization planning to take over the world through your headphones by whispering subliminal communist propaganda. Prove to me that it isn’t.

Actually, I am publicly encouraging someone to write an iPod virus that, when connected to Harmony, will attack the Real Network relentlessly. Now do my bidding.

aldo

Aug 17, 2004, 10:41 AM

cheaper prices? if someone can't afford a dollar a song or 9.99 for a cd then they shouldn't be wasting $ on music.

HAHAHA. Please. Stop it.

You are actually complaining that Real is giving Apple some 'real' competition and therefore will force Apple to drive down their own prices?

Are you the kinda guy that complains when Apple cut's prices?

BTW: these songs will work 'forever' on your iPod. Apple can't cut it off, because if they did, everyone would have to re-download _every_ song with a new encryption method with a software update on their iPod. Not gonna happen.

Not only that, I think 49cents is a very reasonable price for a music download, BECAUSE:

1) No physical distribution of CDs
2) No CDs. No cases. No cover linings.
3) Far more automated than a music store with rent, utility bills and staff.

The interesting thing is that you guys would be over the moon if Apple priced it's songs at 49c/each.

Oh another thing, a ton of stuff in OSX works because it is reverse engineered. Connecting to Windows networks for example - based on the SAMBA project which is 100% reverse engineered.

If you really think it's so immoral to improve compatibility of products, then please don't connect to a windows network with your Mac.

RHutch

Aug 17, 2004, 10:43 AM

if there is no real legal action apple can take, then i guess it's bad for apple but great for consumers because a price war will be around the corner.

I don't think that this will lead to a price war. Real is losing money on each song they sell this way, so I don't believe that they will do it for very long. They are just doing it for a while to try to get the attention of new customers. They are going to take the loss for a while in the hopes that they will gain new customers who will buy regularly. Apple doesn't need to cut prices to get customers; they already have them.

CmdrLaForge

Aug 17, 2004, 10:43 AM

Thats great news for the customers ! I can't see why anybody is voting negative unless he/she is an Apple employee.

More competition is good.

jg3

Aug 17, 2004, 10:46 AM

The iPod should be more open than it is. I think most people can agree on this. If Apple really makes a lot more money selling iPods than songs on the iTMS (as I believe they do), then there's no reason they should be afraid to license FairPlay - sure, it will introduce competition on the price of music, but they will more than make up for that market pressure by selling more iPods and collecting licensing fees.

That said, Real is (as we've come to expect from Real) going about it in a very low fashion. Apple ought to quash their stupid rebellion, but in a way that really kicks them in the teeth, and maybe even puts the final nail in their coffin: announce a licensing deal with at least one major online distributor and release an iPod software update to block Harmony songs at the same time!

Loge

Aug 17, 2004, 10:46 AM

Not only that, I think 49cents is a very reasonable price for a music download, BECAUSE:

1) No physical distribution of CDs
2) No CDs. No cases. No cover linings.
3) Far more automated than a music store with rent, utility bills and staff.

Yes, but it is a promotion for a limited period. No-one is suggesting Real is going to supply songs at that price long term.

aldo

Aug 17, 2004, 10:47 AM

I don't think that this will lead to a price war. Real is losing money on each song they sell this way, so I don't believe that they will do it for very long. They are just doing it for a while to try to get the attention of new customers. They are going to take the loss for a while in the hopes that they will gain new customers who will buy regularly. Apple doesn't need to cut prices to get customers; they already have them.

Oh, so you have insider information? How do you know they haven't struck a deal with the record companies to get songs at say, 49c. They could sell them at cost, losing a few cents for download bandwidth but they can make that up in the other stuff they sell.

I'm no fan of Real, but remember they have put out a fully working, 100% compatible Real Player for OSX, something MS hasn't done. They have made a free, opensource streaming server for Linux, OSX and Windows. They certainly don't deserve to go out of business.

Remember, they _asked_ Apple multiple times and were turned down. Apple is full of half-truths imo, one minute praising open standards when it wants to and shutting out everyone else when it pleases them.

Java

Aug 17, 2004, 10:47 AM

I tried to click on buy, and this is what I recevied.

RHutch

Aug 17, 2004, 10:48 AM

do we even know if apple will file a suit against real. im sure real's legal team checked before they went into this whole mess, but i could be wrong.

iJon

I don't understand your logic here. If every corporation "checked" before they got into things like this, there wouldn't be any suits for patent infringement, etc. But there is a suit against Apple and 26 (?) other companies related to use of jpeg's. You would think that Apple would check into this, right?

On the other hand, maybe the companies filing suits just "think" that they have a good case.

Regardless, checking into something doesn't mean that you will be able to avoid a suit. So don't believe that just because Real went ahead with their plan it doesn't mean that they won't get sued and lose.

Partsmutt

Aug 17, 2004, 10:48 AM

This could end up being Apples saving grace if they play their cards right. They can now use this to their advantage and start licensing Fairplay to other companies (and kill off Harmony so Real will license also).

Why do they need to do this? Micro$oft. Those of us who buy Macs and iPods do so because we're willing to pay more for what we think is the best. Most people aren't like that, and will buy up another solution if it's cheaper. M$ is working on their own music package to compete with Apple. I feel safe in my belief that it won't be as nice, but I'm also equally commited to the idea that M$ will sell their systems at a loss just to pound the competition. They did that with the X-box.

This is gonna seem off the wall, but I'm going somewhere with this: Remember what MS did with USB technology when win98 came out? If a manufacturer made a USB device and wanted Microsofts "designed for win98" logo on the box (which was a big deal at the time for some reason) the device had to be disabled under win95, even though win95 osr2 supported the USB just fine (for most usb devices at the time- mice keyboards etc). This was their way of forcing the consumer to upgrade in order to use peripherals that should have worked anyway. Now who is to say they won't do the same with their music service? Make it dirt cheap. Millions of people want in on it because of the price. They license to everyone and their brother, including Real. But they have the caveat that any device that'll play their stuff, must exclude Fairplay or Harmony. No one will license Reals Harmony at that point and no one can license Fairplay anyway. Yet again, MS will rule the world with an inferior product.

They only way Apples gonna come out of this is to license Fairplay NOW and build a huge fan base through themselves and other manufacturers. The iPod and the music business isn't the same as the computer business, and Apple shouldn't follow the same business plan with it.

aldo

Aug 17, 2004, 10:49 AM

Yes, but it is a promotion for a limited period. No-one is suggesting Real is going to supply songs at that price long term.

True, but I believe that 49c is a fairer price than 99c. I don't see why you'd pay the same amount for a lossy-compressed 128k AAC when you can get a full CD for $9.99. Obviously it's connivence, but I purchase CDs when I can and keep itunes for one or two songs I like.

sinisterdesign

Aug 17, 2004, 10:49 AM

So, good for Real...let's get some competition in this market, and open up DRM standards. We can't let Apple screw this one up, and end up losing the market to Microsoft DRM, as they did with operating systems. They should have learned by now that ubiquity is a good thing.

so when Real hacks all the DRM out of iTMS, you don't think the Big5 labels are going to freak out and pull the plug on online sales? Apple doesn't OWN the industry, they just worked out a happy medium btw all the groups involved.

let Real show how vulnerable DRM is and the RIAA will yank everything but DRM'ed CDs, which suck. i like having choices, too, but don't forget that online sales is one outlet that the recording industries don't have to do if they don't want to. i think it's a win for everyone involved right now, but if Real shows security holes in the system, why wouldn't the Big5 jack up prices to "offset" the illegal file trasnfers.

i don't know, maybe i have a bleak outlook on Harmony's impact on the online music sales industry, but i just think Apple struck a nice, delicate balance and i don't want Real jumping on the scales and watching everyone fall off...

Frisco

Aug 17, 2004, 10:50 AM

musicstore.real.com (http://musicstore.real.com)

I believe it is only built into the Windows version of the software.

Interestingly, they are selling 192 kbps AAC tracks, rather than 128kbps. I think that is a good thing.

It says downloads are only available to Windows users using IE ??? Not Mac compatiable?

RHutch

Aug 17, 2004, 10:50 AM

seriously, you buy that? when you read articles like the ones about XP SP2 and how it breaks apps like office and how it only took MS a year longer than it should have to make a service pack that should never have been needed, you feel the simple fact that the name of the company is repeated several times, is somehow good for them? seriously?

I thought the same thing when I read that post. There is such a thing as bad publicity. Ask Kathy Lee Gifford if it was good publicity when the news came out about the children in sweatshops making her line of clothing.

aldo

Aug 17, 2004, 10:52 AM

This could end up being Apples saving grace if they play their cards right. They can now use this to their advantage and start licensing Fairplay to other companies (and kill off Harmony so Real will license also).

But the iPod is a short-term 'craze'. It won't be around as big as it is now for much longer. Apple knows that, and that's why they need the lock-in - they want to control the millions of iPod user's song choice when it comes to downloads. If they licence it, they may sell a few more iPods now and again but in the end, they need the recurring revenue of iTMS.

Chappers

Aug 17, 2004, 10:52 AM

Actually I think the petition shows how pathetic Apple zealots can be.

If this were Apple doing the very same thing to another competitor who had a lock on the market you would all be behind Apple cheering. Another win for the "little guy" as everyone says. It really stings when it's turned around on Apple.

I've used, administered, developed on OSX, BSD, Linux, Solaris, and Windows and have had experience will the zealots of each platform. It's amazing how all of the Apple zealots sound just like the Windows ones you trash all of the time. In the end you are all alike, just behind what each considers a winning solution.

I personally am not a zealot. My comments revolved around the petition, which includes many windows users who seem to hate Real. Setting up a web site like this saying you are going to send it to Apple was rather foolish at best. Can you imagine what they will say when they do send it " Dear Apple we have a petition with lots of signatures on it from people with a lot to say about your DRM - what do you think about that?"

aldo

Aug 17, 2004, 10:55 AM

so when Real hacks all the DRM out of iTMS, you don't think the Big5 labels are going to freak out and pull the plug on online sales? Apple doesn't OWN the industry, they just worked out a happy medium btw all the groups involved.

Oh dear. Have you heard something of a contract? It basically assures both parties that they will do whatever they said.

The RIAA could pull out now, but they'd incur huge penalties.

ericmooreart

Aug 17, 2004, 10:57 AM

I say buy as many songs at 49 cents as you can, and convert them to mp3s before the next Apple update!!!

Xnet

Aug 17, 2004, 10:58 AM

I tired downloading a song and got this:

Sorry,

Downloads are only available on PCs running Windows 98 and up and with:

Internet Explorer 5.5, or newer

Netscape 7.0, or newer

So much for iPod / Mac compatibility.

Tulse

Aug 17, 2004, 10:58 AM

The iPod is already "open" -- it supports the format that 99% of music is purchased in, namely, CDs, as well as a number of other open formats, such as MP3s and unprotected AAC. What Real is complaining about is that the iPod doesn't happen to support their own, proprietary DRM.

And make no mistake, this is a desperation move on their part. Conventionally, there are two reasons for a healthy business to sell items at a loss: a) to make it more likely for folks to continue to do business with you when the sale stops, either through some sort of lock-in, or positive experiences with your product, or b) to promote some other, related product that you make a profit on. In the latter case, Apple has the iPod which it uses as its profit centre for its music play, so it can afford to sell essentially "at cost" music. Real has no other major way to make money from selling music except selling more music, so b) doesn't work for Real. In the former case, if the music format is portable, then, price being equal, people will choose the music store that is easiest to use, or with the biggest selection, and iTMS is routinely touted as the winner among all online stores in these qualities. So again, once its half-price sale is over, Real won't have gained much, since it seems unlikely that folks would stick with it.

Sure, this garners Real some short-term publicity, but I just don't think the business model works. It's desperation.

Chappers

Aug 17, 2004, 10:59 AM

But the iPod is a short-term 'craze'. It won't be around as big as it is now for much longer. Apple knows that, and that's why they need the lock-in - they want to control the millions of iPod user's song choice when it comes to downloads. If they licence it, they may sell a few more iPods now and again but in the end, they need the recurring revenue of iTMS.

You maybe right (or wrong) but I remember people saying the iPod was a stupid idea in the first place, in fact I seem to remember them saying the same thing when the Sony walkman came out. Its just a craze, its stupid, the music quality is not good.

Apple want to control it probably for two main reasons
1. Money (they do get some from selling songs (not much but...)
2. They had to show the record companies that they were secure etc

maybe your reason comes in 3rd place....maybe

aldo

Aug 17, 2004, 11:01 AM

Erm.. Apple's BS about not making money off iTMS is just that, BS. Of course they want the money.

While I'm not saying that the iPod is going to suddenly dead, it will not sell in these quantities. Margins will fall aswell.

12ibookg4

Aug 17, 2004, 11:06 AM

real is losing money on this sale and the only reason they are having it is to get some publicity for harmony. so buy all you can before the sale ends on labor day

virividox

Aug 17, 2004, 11:07 AM

maybe apple will slash :) hehe i doubt it i mean we are getting the songs pretty low already but hey if they do great for the consumer, but i wonder how much apple can slash before they start losing

jkhanson

Aug 17, 2004, 11:07 AM

I can't find it at the "Freedom of Choice" site. Am I missing something really obvious, or did they take it down?

marco114

Aug 17, 2004, 11:07 AM

If this isn't hacker mentality, then I don't know what is...

Why should I use RealPlayer® instead of iTunes to manage my iPod?

Question
Why should I use RealPlayer® instead of iTunes to manage my iPod?

Answer
When you use Apple iTunes to synchronize your iPod, iTunes deletes any content on your iPod that was transferred using a program other than iTunes. This content includes all music previously transferred to your iPod using RealPlayer.*(All versions of Apple iTunes for Windows up to version 4.6 include this behavior)

When you use RealPlayer to manage your iPod, RealPlayer does not delete any content from your iPod unless you specify. RealPlayer also preserves the iPod's compatibility with other music stores, so you can still transfer, store, and play back music purchased from other music stores.

It is also recommended that you not start iTunes with your iPod connected to your PC because Apple may automatically install new software on your iPod that could prevent it from being able to play songs you may have already purchased from the RealPlayer Music Store.

*If you accidentally synchronize with iTunes and find that tracks you purchased from the RealPlayer Music Store are no longer on your iPod, you can always transfer the missing tracks to your iPod again using RealPlayer.

Spades

Aug 17, 2004, 11:11 AM

so when Real hacks all the DRM out of iTMS, you don't think the Big5 labels are going to freak out and pull the plug on online sales? Apple doesn't OWN the industry, they just worked out a happy medium btw all the groups involved.

I see you have no clue how this whole system works. Real has not hacked the DRM on iTMS files. They just have a method to add DRM to their own files that is compatible with Fairplay. They've cracked nothing. What they do is take the DRM off of their own files and apply DRM to them that works just like Fairplay does. The result is a Fairplay-compatible DRM file.

No cracking of DRM involved. Nothing's broken.

There's also absolutely nothing illegal about this. The algorithm behind Fairplay isn't patented. As I understand it, it's just a little fiddling with AES. It probably isn't patentable, even if Apple had tried. Patent protection is the only possible way Real could have been kept from doing this. But with no patent, there's nothing wrong being done here.

And if Real's selling at a lower price with higher quality, it might encourage Apple to try to match the competition. Competition is good.

aethier

Aug 17, 2004, 11:15 AM

did anyone else notice that the link to the petition has been taking off the freedom website?

aethier

kenaustus

Aug 17, 2004, 11:16 AM

If Real has songs at 49 cents go ahead and buy as many as you want - as long as you can burn them to a CD and move to iTunes. WHen the promotion is over drop Real (ensuring that they do not charge you a monthly fee) and get back to iTunes & TMS. Real is going to blow $2 million on this promotion so you might as well get some of the sugar.

Harmony isn't going to be that great - it won't let you use iTunes, probably screws up the sync of Calendar & Address Book and will keep iPod users from anything else APple comes out with for the iPod.

Fact it that competitors need to deliver a complete package - player, store and jukebox software - in order to really compete with the iPod. That takes a lot of money and a very elegant (and stable) design. Real couldn't hack that - too cheap, incompetent or impotent? - and this is their only chance. Real competitors (pun unintended) will surface and do well. After all, Apple has showed them how to do it. Real just ain't in that group.

lynnpye

Aug 17, 2004, 11:16 AM

Right now, iPod plays the most mainstream formats in addition to Apple's own proprietary format. Also, iTunes Music Store is the current leader in terms of sales volume and catalog size among current online music stores.

If iPod is opened to play, for instance, protected WMA and Real's format (Helix is it?), I see the following:

- Less differentiation between stores. Why shop exclusively at iTMS when you can go to other online stores and get it cheaper? Much has been made about how access to iTMS is done only through iTunes and so "it just works". But this concept won't remain exclusive to Apple for long. Unlike the iPod design itself, other companies, particularly Microsoft and Real, could just as easily incorporate their own stores into their own players in a similar fashion. Real doing so doesn't scare me. Microsoft doing so does.

- Less reason to go iPod (besides form factor). Yes, the iPod's design makes it a leader, but for how much longer? No, Apple isn't "beleaguered" (who hates that term besides me?), but all it would take is a number of deals similar to the Apple-HP deal to put other players in the hot little hands of folks with a mind to shop where they're told to shop.

Currently, iPod demands you either buy the CD outright or buy from iTMS. No other option exists. iTMS demands you buy an iPod. Apple is riding this crest and, I suspect, hoping to weather the coming storm. The failure of Napster, Real and everyone's grandma to operate an online store has actually probably just been a learning experience for Microsoft. They will likely be the main competitor in this space.

Apple doesn't want other players to play protected AAC because then other players can operate with iTMS and Apple will lose money on iTMS (because it won't be selling as many iPods) and possibly losing market share with the iPod.

Apple doesn't want the iPod to play other protected formats because then folks will go to other stores (possibly) and buy that music. That will not likely hurt them in the short run because they will still have iPods and iTMS will still be selling music, but iTMS won't be pushing as many iPods because you could buy the same music elsewhere. And when it came time to replace your iPod, there would be no reason to go with iPod over another brand except whatever design issues Apple could bring to the table.

Creating more deals like the HPod would mitigate issues with opening the iPod to other formats since more folks would be getting iPods anyway. What does it matter what you play if you play it on an iPod?

Look for more such deals and then, and only then, for the iPod to be able to play other formats.

But then if I could figure all of this stuff out so well, I'd be a millionaire, so take with your own grain of salt, as necessary.

Loge

Aug 17, 2004, 11:16 AM

I can't find it at the "Freedom of Choice" site. Am I missing something really obvious, or did they take it down?

Looks like its gone. Obviously being sent to Apple at this very moment!

ZildjianKX

Aug 17, 2004, 11:17 AM

I'm all for competition, and I'm very happy if what a poster said above is true about the songs being 192 kbps (take that Apple)...

But really, screw you Real for not making a mac compatible store... (granted, it took Apple awhile to make a Windows compatible store).

odo

Aug 17, 2004, 11:20 AM

What a bunch of losers. They even took down the comments people wrote on the newsarticles. Now it only says how many have read it. The link to the petition is still working but not available on their site anymore:

http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?r4apple

So have fun reading... :D

swissmann

Aug 17, 2004, 11:21 AM

Some talk about Real dying. Does anyone have a link to an article outlining their recent financial status? I appreciate it.

svenas1

Aug 17, 2004, 11:26 AM

Actually I think the petition shows how pathetic Apple zealots can be.

If this were Apple doing the very same thing to another competitor who had a lock on the market you would all be behind Apple cheering. Another win for the "little guy" as everyone says. It really stings when it's turned around on Apple.

I've used, administered, developed on OSX, BSD, Linux, Solaris, and Windows and have had experience will the zealots of each platform. It's amazing how all of the Apple zealots sound just like the Windows ones you trash all of the time. In the end you are all alike, just behind what each considers a winning solution.

Oh please...

First of all, many people signing that petition aren't Apple users. Some have expressly said they use Windows. If anything, they are anti-Real zealots.

If Reals stuff has made people this angry, this is a great way to voice their opinions.

timwindsor

Aug 17, 2004, 11:27 AM

So the petition doesn't go the way Real wants it to go and they remove it from their site.

It's actually a good predictor of what will happen to anyone who buys Real songs for their iPods: one minute it's there, the next it's gone....

beefcake

Aug 17, 2004, 11:28 AM

As consumers, everyone on this board should see this as good news. If Real Networks can succeed with this promotion, then it will add some competition to a one-horse market and lower prices for everyone. If you're still more loyal to Apple than your own wallet, this will only sell more iPods because the music for them is now cheaper. iTMS was created to sell iPods; Real is now doing all the work to achieve the same end result: selling more iPods.

macguymike

Aug 17, 2004, 11:30 AM

I've used, administered, developed on OSX, BSD, Linux, Solaris, and Windows and have had experience will the zealots of each platform. It's amazing how all of the Apple zealots sound just like the Windows ones you trash all of the time. In the end you are all alike, just behind what each considers a winning solution.

Really, that's true of zealots of any stripe. Christian or Muslim, liberal or conservative, Mac or Windows, and so on. It's pretty amusing that few zealots ever figure themselves guilty of the same traits they accuse the other side of possessing; they're always the ones in the right in whatever Crusade they've chosen a side in. :rolleyes:

Fukui

Aug 17, 2004, 11:35 AM

Oh, so you have insider information? How do you know they haven't struck a deal with the record companies to get songs at say, 49c. They could sell them at cost, losing a few cents for download bandwidth but they can make that up in the other stuff they sell.

They actually said they expected to loose money this quarter because of thier promotions. (loosing upwards of 5c a share)

Remember, they _asked_ Apple multiple times and were turned down.
Actually, they threatened to partner with MS if steve didn't talk to glasser about an alliance; they didn't ask, it was an demand. You don't threaten someone with going to thier enemy of you want to be your friend!

RHutch

Aug 17, 2004, 11:36 AM

Some talk about Real dying. Does anyone have a link to an article outlining their recent financial status? I appreciate it.

Here you go:

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=rnwk

spinko

Aug 17, 2004, 11:36 AM

Real's procedure is certainly open to criticism but I think the iPod should reflect what Apple has been preaching about for some time now : open standards and better interoperability with others. The bottom line is that the customer doesn't care where the songs come from and what format they are.

I'm afraid to say that Apple is very arrogant about iTMS. The iPod is great but the hype and interest in such devices will wear off eventually and Apple could have a hard time keeping the pace up at this level and find itself in the same "back to the wall" situation Real is in right now. Maybe they should try and make some money by licensing the technology instead of insisting on the current business model.

Just a thought

narco

Aug 17, 2004, 11:38 AM

OnaMacSince1989

Aug 17, 2004, 11:45 AM

The news I saw on another site indicated this would just be a temporary sale price to gain attention. Real's prices will go back to the regular $0.99 after the sale is over. :rolleyes:

cslewis

Aug 17, 2004, 11:48 AM

Here you go:

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=rnwk

Ha! Real is going to crap, and this promotion won't fix that.

morkintosh

Aug 17, 2004, 11:53 AM

if there is no real legal action apple can take, then i guess it's bad for apple but great for consumers because a price war will be around the corner.

even if there is no legal recourse for them they still control the standard and the iPod, all they have to do is change it and let us all update our iPods, breaking the real networks hack and rendering the cheap songs they sell useless.

gekko513

Aug 17, 2004, 11:54 AM

I don't really care. When we get iTMS Norway I will buy from Apple anyway.

If Real actually had a license for Fairplay so that I could be sure that the songs wouldn't just stop working at some point AND if Apple was charging overprice (like Microsoft for Windows) then I might consider buying from Real.

Apart from that I will be happy to be in a closed system were everything just works.

caveman_uk

Aug 17, 2004, 11:57 AM

But the iPod is a short-term 'craze'. It won't be around as big as it is now for much longer. Apple knows that, and that's why they need the lock-in - they want to control the millions of iPod user's song choice when it comes to downloads. If they licence it, they may sell a few more iPods now and again but in the end, they need the recurring revenue of iTMS.
Exactly. The ipod is the money maker now. It really doesn't matter in the short-term what DRM format the ipod uses. If the ipod played Fairplay and WMP then that would sell the most ipods. So why doesn't Apple do it? Because control of the future DRM matters more. Controlling the market leading DRM means little now as the iTMS has little real value at the moment - controlling it and maintaining it's no 1 position is important for the future. DRM isn't going away - even if you want it to and having Apple control the no 1 system is obviously better for Mac users than either Real or Microsoft controlling it. One day the iTMS (or what follows it) will make a lot of money....and Apple knows it.

aethier

Aug 17, 2004, 12:02 PM

hmm, this publicity isn't going over to well with their shareholders, down 19 cents... standing at 5.04 dollars pwer share.... :rolleyes:

aethier

Savage Henry

Aug 17, 2004, 12:07 PM

-Every non-CD player I see in the street is an iPod
-Random non-music non-Apple people I know speak of iPod
-More people use iTMS in the UK than any other legal service by a very big margin.

None of the above will last forever, but selling cheap songs is not going to change any of the above, or the current financial dificulties of Real. I pity the fools...

TomSmithMacEd

Aug 17, 2004, 12:10 PM

I think this is pretty cool. The real music store isn't that bad. And if I can get legal music for cheaper that is fantastic. The funny part is that Real isn't even going to win. Because we all know they are losing money on these songs. The record companys get like 70 cents from every song downloaded. So they have to pay 20 cents for every song downloaded. Also... even if this does create more of a customer base, once they raise the price again.... who would want to buy?

But hey I like the idea of opening up the iPod. Or at least opening up AAC fairplay to other online music stores.

krohde

Aug 17, 2004, 12:11 PM

Wonder Boy

Aug 17, 2004, 12:13 PM

HAHAHA. Please. Stop it.

You are actually complaining that Real is giving Apple some 'real' competition and therefore will force Apple to drive down their own prices?

im not complaining about competition. all im saying is that 99 cents per track is ok by me, and anyone who cant afford that needs a new job or go into audiophyle rehab. 99cents per track is NOT breaking the bank. if it is, good luck to you.

Charko

Aug 17, 2004, 12:17 PM

Real have been assured by a very, very large software company that they wont go broke.

In fact this whole campaign is probably the idea of this large and very rich company - or it was a joint effort.

Did anybody think that this large, rich company was going to allow any other company to get the upper hand in any area that it's interested in.

This is just the first of many dirty tricks we're going to see.

billyboy

Aug 17, 2004, 12:17 PM

The idea that Real are doing this just to get at Apple wouldnt wash with shareholders who have elected a CEO to generate returns on their investment, not do over Steve Jobs.

To Mac zealots, it isnt justified to villify Real for taking a loss on 49c sales. You dont know what their marketing plan for this promo is, or what their long term aims are. Apple were losing money from day one of launching the Music Store and taken on its own, the store was initially a financial bad joke ie no sensible businessman launches a store with the aim of making a couple of cents for the kudos of providing the best music service in town. But there was more to Apple's strategy than just a store, ie it was a trojan horse for the iPod. So, I dont know what Real's game is, it might be clever it might not, but they are perfectly justified diverting their marketing budget or whatever for subsidising tracks by 50 cents instead of just sticking the money in expensive ads on TV etc.

I actually think Apple are rubbing their little mits together. If Reals "iPod compatible" store bombs because it is so unslick compared to ITMS, then Jobs can say I told you so, announce another 100,000 tracks or free iPods or something to rub it into Real and do something with iPod to stop the Harmony deal from working. If Real pull it off and provide a genuine competitor for the Music Store, then Jobs says thanks to Real for paying for all the bandwidth on tracks Apple was going to make a few cents on, and Apple quietly cranks up production on high profit ipods for the Real converts coming from PC land.

It pays Apple to be the smartest leader of the pack with $5bn in the bank, because theoretically they can outdo anyone following behind. And Real are following behind nicely.

MacBytes

Aug 17, 2004, 12:19 PM

Category: News and Press Releases
Link: Real\'s petition backfires thanks to Apple fans (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20040817121957)
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)

Approved by Mudbug

Mudbug

Aug 17, 2004, 12:20 PM

typically I hate this response, but here goes:

<Nelson>

Haaa-haaa <points>

</Nelson>

.Andy

Aug 17, 2004, 12:23 PM

Was the iPod immediately available for windows? NO!
Was iTunes immediately available for PC? No!
Is Rhapsody immediately available for Mac? No.

Did Apple start a website sprouting FUD about a competitor endorsed by questionable aging rockers? No!

Did Apple fill your machine with spyware and commercials? No!

Did Steve ever refer to himself as ROCK ON JOBS? No!

Mudbug

Aug 17, 2004, 12:28 PM

stoid

Aug 17, 2004, 12:28 PM

Haters. I think that they will figure out soon enough based on sales if anyone cares. Online petitions are stupid anyway. Does anyone have any record of an online petition accomplishing anything?

Ja Di ksw

Aug 17, 2004, 12:31 PM

as stunned as someone waking up with their head stapled to the carpet

hahahaha. I have to use that line sometime

autrefois

Aug 17, 2004, 12:32 PM

Does iTunes or iPod software automatically update on PCs? It doesn't on Macs.

If not, what's to stop someone from simply not downloading the inevitable update from Apple breaking Real's format?

If Apple also upgrades the store so that you have to use new version of iTunes/iPod software, wouldn't that just convince people curious about Real that they should abandon iTunes? If Apple's gonna mess with my music, I'm not going to buy from them anymore. PC users are not generally Apple fans—they may be iTunes or iPod fans, but not Apple fans.

If Windows XP SP2 had broken PC users' ability to use iTunes/iPod, would Apple have been angry? You bet. Or how about this: when their music store finally comes online, why shouldn't Microsoft break iTunes/iPod in Windows since it will be competing with their own store? Will Apple say, "Well, it is their OS and their music store after all."

I don't like Real one iota, but why shouldn't they be allowed to sell iPod-compatible songs? Apple should compete with them, like by having the biggest catalogue (which they do) and best-designed, easiest-to-use store store (which they do). The only problem I see with Real's store itself is that it's not available for Macs yet. And I certainly don't think Apple's behavior will encourage a Mac version anytime soon.

Please don't make the same mistake you made with computers, Apple. Don't become a closed system, or else even clearly inferior stores will eventually overtake you and iPod sales may drop from bad publicity or because people just won't know if and when Apple will try to stop them from choosing where they buy music.

I'm not sure we want to find out the answer to the question "Do I want an expensive/good/cool player that only works with iTunes or a cheaper/less cool player but one which works just about every store except iTunes?"

sfhc21

Aug 17, 2004, 12:38 PM

cheaper prices? if someone can't afford a dollar a song or 9.99 for a cd then they shouldn't be wasting $ on music.

Thats about the dumbest thing I have heard in awhile...if you would rather pay more for music - go right ahead. But I'd rather see all music downloads come down to Real's price, and get more music.

Mudbug

Aug 17, 2004, 12:39 PM

Haters. I think that they will figure out soon enough based on sales if anyone cares. Online petitions are stupid anyway. Does anyone have any record of an online petition accomplishing anything?

generally speaking they do absolutely nothing.

TrenchMouth

Aug 17, 2004, 12:39 PM

I think on Apples part it would be wise to allow people to sell content that plays on othe iPod so long as it was not in WMA format as that would be the only real conflict of interests. If Real's service is made availible for the Mac and it doesnt completely suck then I wouldnt mind looking through their cataloge. I like competition, and Apple should as well.

However, here is the problem that I see with Reals strategy; how the hell is this thing going to be sustainable? Apple runs its music service as a way to sell iPods, its just an added benifit that it turns a profit every now and then, but for the most part it hardly even makes a dime worth looking at. And thats with 70% of the market. I am not sure where and how these competitors are cutting corners to save cash and still distribute music for less or the same price and still plan on making a viable business. I think that ultimately the only online music stores that will survive are those that belong to much larger companies that dont have much at risk and are really only selling music to push other products. I assume that Sony will not bail out on their store, and i assume MS will push its store onward, but Real and all of these other smaller companies are just asking for pain by going this route. Thats just my opinoin. I feel they just entered the market for a different reason than Apple, who really just wanted to sell you an iPod and found a great way to do it.

jcshas

Aug 17, 2004, 12:40 PM

I guess I should have expected that the overwhelming majority of Macrumors readers would side with Apple on this one. It is clear to me that Real is attempting to ride on the coat tails of Apple's success with legal music downloads. However, what is unclear to me is why should Apple's response be considered any different than with what Microsoft has been doing all along with their monopoly? I don't think everyone should be so hasty in dismissing what Real is attempting to do; especially when you consider that the consumer is the one that stands to benefit the most from this (i.e. competitive enterprise=more choice=better products). My two cents.

RHutch

Aug 17, 2004, 12:42 PM

They have posted the petition (same wording) again without the option to post comments. You can only sign your name to assert your agreement. You can't even see who has signed; when you click the link to view the signatures, it just shows how many people have "signed". When I looked last, the new petition had 19 signatures.

Wonder Boy

Aug 17, 2004, 12:47 PM

Thats about the dumbest thing I have heard in awhile...if you would rather pay more for music - go right ahead. But I'd rather see all music downloads come down to Real's price, and get more music.

you really think 99cents is expensive? im all for lowering prices, but i have no tolerance for whiners who think 99cents is too much. get a job.

stoid

Aug 17, 2004, 12:48 PM

Real is the best part of my life...I do some of my best thinking watching it buffer.

classic

I love this stuff. Now if only people would open their eyes to see the that they are getting fleeced by AOL and Microsoft, the world would be a better place!

space2go

Aug 17, 2004, 12:50 PM

musicpyrite

Aug 17, 2004, 12:53 PM

cr2sh

Aug 17, 2004, 12:56 PM

This is hilarious... Real sucks it so hard.

Watch the "ratings" of this thread shift from negative to positive, now that Real has acknowledged that people think they suck.

Too funny. :D

liketom

Aug 17, 2004, 12:58 PM

I COULD READ THIS STUFF ALL NIGHT IT IS SOOOOO FUNNY

"394. Ryan Apple, please block Real songs. Real says freedom of choice as long as you use a Windows PC, what choice is that? Apple please reverse engineer Real Player so I can play Real content in my QuickTime player, that would be freedom of choice. Long live Apple and the iTunes Music Store!
393. Jason Good Real sucks...Apple is the real choice....Go sell your crap to somone else..APPLE IS YEARS AHEAD OF ANYTHING YOU COULD THINK OF..LONG LIVE APPLE AND IT'S GREAT USER BASE...OH AND BY THE WAY NICE CHOICE IT ONLY RUNS ON WINDOWS...
392. Rob Glaser, CEO of Real Networks please send me the transcript, my network blocked access to my own petition. my email address is rglaser@real.com thanks
391. Nadia Vellemann Real is like Return of the Living Dead, you think it has died and gone away, but with a groan it comes towards you trying to suck the money from your wallet... Avoid at all costs, you have been warned... iTunes rocks, iPod rocks, Apple rocks, shame on you deceitful Real Corporation if your software was any good then you would have market share, but it isnt and never has been, even Windows Media Player is preferable either on a PC or a Mac !!!"

so funny number 392 lol

tom

Vonnie

Aug 17, 2004, 01:03 PM

evansls

Aug 17, 2004, 01:04 PM

You can view all the signatures here:
http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?r4apple

Thought you all might want to laugh it all up! hahahah

macridah

Aug 17, 2004, 01:08 PM

Real will hit EOL soon and then the employees will be SOL.

autrefois

Aug 17, 2004, 01:12 PM

If the petition weren't sponsored by Real, I would sign it.

"Choice rocks!" (http://freedomofmusicchoice.org/) Hee hee. I'm almost willing to refute my own arguments after hearing a slogan like that. :rolleyes: What's next: Real is totally rad? :)

Some_Big_Spoon

Aug 17, 2004, 01:13 PM

Now they're saying they killed the other petition becasue or spammer and virus concerns (due to mail addresses being displayed), which is a lie. So, we're supposed to join their faux, self-serving "revolution", but we're not allowed to know the truth? That theyu're getting bad press, and that this is blowing up in their face?

I'm all for open standards, and fair use (not the RIAA's definition, but free, as in beer), but Real's just doing this to stir up buzz, and they're playing dirty pool.

Build a better widget and people will come knocking, stir upp FUD, and you'll catch ***** for it. You can place appropriate company names into slots above.

ShermDog

Aug 17, 2004, 01:17 PM

I agree that competition is great for consumers, and can only lead to better products and lower prices. However, I believe that the way Real has gone about adding iPod compatibility is wrong, if not illegal.

Personally, I think Apple should just watch quietly and let Real continue its promotion of iPod compatibility. In the end, I don't think it will have a significant impact on iTMS users or iPod sales. I had the opportunity to use the Real Music Store earlier today (on a PC), and I can't say it was a terrible experience. If not for the uncertainty of whether the songs purchased from Real will continue to work with the iPod in the near future, I don't see a problem with getting songs for half the price of the iTMS. What kind of knucklehead wouldn't prefer to buy songs for half the price? But, when the sale IS over, and Real and the iTMS are essentially competing on equal footing, I think that everyone who ran to Real for $0.49 songs would come back to the iTMS simply because pound for pound (or byte for byte) it is the superior music store.

I'm a social psychologist, and I've conducted this type of research on consumer behavior. It's like when you have a favorite brand of potato chips, but one week, the generic brand is on sale for only 1/2 the cost of the name brand. You might snatch up a bag or two of the cheaper brand simply because it is on sale. But once the sale is over, it's right back to the name brand because the overall quality is just plain better than the generic brand. Even if the non-sale cost of the generic brand is lower than the name brand, you stick with the name brand because it's worth the premium you pay.

For those of you who are hoping that Apple will nip Real's encroachment into iPod compatibility in the bud...at the time the newest generation iPod was announced, I recall some Apple executive claiming that there were features included on the iPod that weren't disclosed. I suspect that whenever these special features are announced, they will require a software update that will also include some type of block against Real's music files. My bet is that the desire to have these new features will outweigh any desire to maintain compatibility with Real's music store.

Mr_Ed

Aug 17, 2004, 01:19 PM

LMFAO! :D

Found a beauty of a comment on the very first page:

9. Real Obsolete Why is [BUFFERING...] Real [BUFFERING...] even still in busi[BUFFERING...]ness?

I couldn't have made a better comment on how lame RealPlayer is.

Chealion

Aug 17, 2004, 01:24 PM

Real's idea was great! Opening up the ability so that other songs could be put on the iPod is awesome, and that will sell more iPods.

The problem comes in when we consider what happens when you buy those songs...

Using iTunes, it's brilliantly easy to move your songs from iTunes to the iPod. And iTunes can not open new .m4p songs, so how is Real going to get the iPod to receive the songs?

Then there is also Real as a company. There's a reason it is one of the most hated companies. Bad software (not the programmer's fault, read the stories from the programmers and you can see management tied them like hogs) is only the tip of the iceberg.

Lastly, Real's attempts are simply puerile, full of half-truths and disinformation.

Wonderful idea, Intego style execution (any one remember Chicken Little and the Mac OS X virus?).

nagromme

Aug 17, 2004, 01:27 PM

1. More stores supporting iPod is GOOD for users.

2. But Real is not for Mac users... so much for their "freedom of choice."

3. And I'd rather see Apple, not Real, decide when and HOW to open other stores to the iPod--and collect licensing fees.

4. Real will rope SOME people in with this short-term deal.

5. But soon the deal will end and Real will have taken a loss without REMOTELY catching up to Apple in unit sales OR profit OR mindshare OR the quality of the store/jukebox OR the size of the catalog.

6. Anyone who tried this promo and then wants to say "thanks but goodbye" and switch to iTunes can do so without missing a beat.

7. Meanwhile Real is giving the iPod lots of free advertising.

8. And articles in the press about ANY online music store or player--including the Real "battle"--are always free Apple publicity. That's what being the leader does. They ask whether Real can "catch up" to Apple. That's good mindshare for Apple, not so good for the rest.

9. In the end, Apple's lawyers--or programmers--will almost certainly defeat Harmony.

10. Some will be pissed at Apple, most won't care... and later on, Apple will open the iPod to other stores on THEIR terms, when THEY choose the moment.

11. Several iTunes competitors WILL survive--but not catch up to Apple--and Real might be one of them. Choice is good, competition is good (for features if nothing else), and anybody NOT using WMA is good. In the end, let them grab their niche if they can.

12. I've been burned enough by Real software. Others can try it. For me, no thanks, not even on my Windows box. I'll happily standardize on iTunes which had proven itself to me many times over. And which I KNOW won't later break on my future iPod.

iPC

Aug 17, 2004, 01:28 PM

I happen to agree with Real's statement. Of course the thinlly veiled intent behind it I am opposed to.

As a computer user... I want to be able to get whatever music I own (whether it is iTMS or cd's or something else) onto my iPod. I will not look down at a company or person (think dvdJohn with DeCSS) that has the same ideals.

However, I will never, ever support REAL. They are a bunch of scumbags... no matter how far it appears they have come.

RIP

Aug 17, 2004, 01:29 PM

Apple should just buy out Real and put an end to this.

SilentPanda

Aug 17, 2004, 01:30 PM

Now they're saying they killed the other petition becasue or spammer and virus concerns (due to mail addresses being displayed), which is a lie.

Actually this message is displayed by any petition on petitiononline.com when the signatures are hidden. This is not something Real put on there (well they did but only because they have chosen to not display the signatures).

CaptainScarlet

Aug 17, 2004, 01:32 PM

Yes Yes Yes...Competition is a very good thing...

However, in this case, the competition isn't very good compared to ITMS or the iPod.

Maxx Power

Aug 17, 2004, 01:35 PM

49 cents won't seem like much of a bargain when Apple updates the iPod to break all songs from Real's site...

Wouldn't that be just like what microsoft does with windows by severely restricting, slowing down or breaking the functionality of non-microshaft software on windows ?

Apple is sinking lower now...

evilgEEk

Aug 17, 2004, 01:39 PM

I'm getting my first iPod later this week, and I am more than happy to support Apple and use iTMS exclusively for online content. But I'm just a casual music listener and would never have been able to rationalize the cost of an iPod at all had it not been for the Cram and Jam promotion.

I say let Real do their thing, it will fail, and then we'll all be one more step closer to them disappearing. I've always hated Real and would never even consider using or buying anything from them, because their software has always been absolutely horrible.

I do agree that competition and lower prices are good for the consumers, but Real has went about it all wrong...and, well...it's Real.. ugh

Windowlicker

Aug 17, 2004, 01:43 PM

Man, talk about a backfire. And to think they set it up as a .org. What lameness... what super lameness. Their petition is owned by people telling them to go shove it. =)

Embarrasing. That's all I can say. Anyways, I wouldn't put too much hope on real selling 700 000 songs in a year. That doesn't mean it's not possible though. I just don't know anyone who knows an online music service that they would use (and one of the reasons might be we don't have itms yet).

nagromme

Aug 17, 2004, 01:43 PM

Wouldn't that be just like what microsoft does with windows by severely restricting, slowing down or breaking the functionality of non-microshaft software on windows ?

Apple is sinking lower now...

Apple has done nothing yet. But they could, because then THEY can profit from opening up their own product to others. I can understand that!

It's not at all like MS breaking non-MS software. The iPod is a closed system supporting certain things--Apple doesn't hide this, and the overall iTunes/iPod system actually makes a better product in some ways. And unlike Windows and third-party apps, the iPod was NEVER promoted as able to play third-party DRM downloads.

And of course you can rip to CD to remove ANY DRM anyway. (I recently tried this and can detect no loss... my friend thought she could tell the difference on one song... and she liked the re-ripped song better :D )

munkle

Aug 17, 2004, 01:44 PM

Personally, I have no idea why those Apple zealots are afraid of a bit of competition in the music download field. The consumer can only be better of with the competition. If you truly believe iTMS is superior, you wouldn't care wether or not another legal-music-download service works with the ipod.

Plus, it is just hypocritical to cheer when Apple or an open-source group reverse-engineers a Microsoft proprietary protocol/fileformat, but start booing when Real reverse-engineers Apples proprietary DRM.

It's not that Real is a competitor which is the problem. The problem is that Real has hacked into Apple's DRM, which is bad for Apple and for the music download industry in general. Apple has built up goodwill with consumers and importantly with the record labels, who were/are very nervous about losing control over their cash cow. Real hacker attempts damage this goodwill.

And all Real (the same Real who are so concerned with compatitability that their music store is only compatible with Windows!) are trying to do is get people locked into their own proprietery DRM format instead of Apple's, hardly the open format warrior that it claims to be! :rolleyes:

narco

Aug 17, 2004, 01:47 PM

I do have a freedom of music choice, it's called amazon, best buy, circuit city, tower records -- I can go to any store and buy a CD and put it on my iPod. The uneducated, potential iPod buyer will think that they can only put songs on the iPod that they buy from iTMS. This kind of trickery will work with new users, but it'll fail once they start learning more.

I am not against having online-music options, I am just against Real's tactics. Sleazy.

.narco

Blue Moon

Aug 17, 2004, 01:48 PM

Go Apple, go apple, go-go-go Apple.

paulypants

Aug 17, 2004, 01:49 PM

I'm going over to ITMS to buy some music...

msconvert

Aug 17, 2004, 01:50 PM

I really think some people on this thread have really got no brains if they don't use that thing in there called memory!

Was the iPod immediately available for windows? NO!
Was iTunes immediately available for PC? No!
Is Rhapsody immediately available for Mac? No.

Some people could even argue that some people here do NOT think before they speak!

Krohde

Rhapsody has been around longer than it took Apple to release a windows product. It was clear that Apple intendeded to release a windows product; It is clear that Real has no intention of releasing a mac product. It is harmony that just came out and that is still windows only. Some people could even argue that some people here do NOT think before they speak!

msconvert

nagromme

Aug 17, 2004, 01:53 PM

I pay .75 cents per song on average from iTunes... because some I buy as whole albums. And that's not counting the over 100 songs Apple gives away each year. Some are great songs. I've also paid as little as $4.95 for an album at iTunes, and $9.99 for a 19-song compilation.

I just downloaded this week's TWO freebies, plus 5 paid songs off albums I'd never buy in their entirety.

(And BTW, neither Apple NOR Real cares about "choice" for its own sake. Apple cares about making money and making great products that stand above the rest--and they're good at doing both. Real cares about making money... and doesn't seem to be so good at it.)

MetallicPenguin

Aug 17, 2004, 01:57 PM

It'll be a flop anyway, so let Real make a total ass of itself.

I think most people will continue to buy music from iTunes, Real will maybe take a fraction of what Napster or other download services take. People are already used to using iTunes; Real's service is probably difficult to use (if it's anything like their crummy player).

.narco

That's what I am hoping for. Remember BuyMusic? Same Ads, etc. They flopped in a month. The only problem I see is the fact that the music industry people will get worried about potential leaks and vulnerabilities and just pull the whole thing off.

Lepton

Aug 17, 2004, 01:58 PM

This is gonna be good. Real's sale lasts until Labor Day. Then, Real announces a million songs were sold or whatever, with great hype-hoopla. Later in the month, Apple announces the new iMacs, Apple announces whatever the rumored secret features placed in the 4G iPods was, and Apple releases an iPod update that implements the new features in the 4G and some other cool stuff in old iPods that everybody wants, and the update also just happens to break every one of those Real songs on all the iPods. "That song's copy protection data is invalid. Delete the song? Y/N" Hilarity ensues.

ryanw

Aug 17, 2004, 02:02 PM

This goes to show you, apple should have made a deal with REAL and licensed their technology to them. Cause now REAL is selling music that will work on the iPod and apple is getting no royalties out of it.

If this was a situation with Microsoft people would be screaming bloody murder. Seriously, think about it.

Lets put MICROSOFT in place of APPLE and place APPLE in the place of REAL in the situation and see if it gets your blood boiling.

--- scenerio ----
Microsoft released a product that everyone is buying, apple tried to license the technology from microsoft to join into the race. Microsoft deined APPLE the rights to even license the technology from Microsoft. Apple finds a way to make the technology work without needing the rights from Microsoft, Microsoft squishes Apple intentially targeting apple's technology and explicitly breaks Apple's technology and can be proven by looking at the compliled binaries and finding exactly where it looks for APPLE TECHNOLOGY and breaks it.
---- end of scenerio ----

Now I know Apple is a "little guy" and I love apple, but this is rediculous. I am seeing people posting how nasty REAL is and how right APPLE is in keeping the technology all to themselves. I want apple to succeed more than anyone, but trying to flex their muscles and do monopoly tatics doesn't work for the little guy. People will get tired of trying to work with the 'power hungry little guy' and move on to bigger better things in the long run. That's how apple lost their market share in the first place.

Uragon

Aug 17, 2004, 02:04 PM

This is my favourite from the original petition:

"53. Hey, Real: It is my brother's own fault, that I get a cold, if he doesn't borrow me his jacket."

JediL1

Aug 17, 2004, 02:07 PM

Whatever happened to the rumor that Microsoft and Apple were negotiating a way to convert from AAC Fairplay to Protected WMA and vice versa?

I would love to see Steve Jobs and Bill Gates on 3-way iChat AV at AppleExpo Paris announcing the death of "Harmony".

(i know, but I don't LIKE Bill Gates and I HATE Rob Glaser)

jettredmont

Aug 17, 2004, 02:09 PM

Someone explain to me why everyone thinks Real is evil for doing this?

I don't think Real is evil for doing this. I think Real is evil because of the crapware it has put out for the past ~10 years (trying to remember exactly when RealPlayer went from okay to crap) and the trickery they resort to to get people to download a "free trial" of the not-free player instead of the free player, and the countless reformat/reinstall cycles I had to do with Windows 98 before finding out that the offending software was RealPlayer, and the general we-don't-care-about-users-we-only-care-about-locking-in-all-content-providers approach of doing business which was lucrative but ultimately not sustainable, and which caused most of the above problems.

That's why Real is evil, and why their software will never corrupt the hard drive of one of my computers ever again.

Spades

Aug 17, 2004, 02:18 PM

Even if the non-sale cost of the generic brand is lower than the name brand, you stick with the name brand because it's worth the premium you pay.

That makes sense, but that's hardly the case here. Real's files are technically superior to Apple's. Real sells 192 kbps AAC while Apple is selling 128. A 49 cent sale is icing on the cake. If Real publicizes it right, I don't see how they can't win from this.

wordmunger

Aug 17, 2004, 02:19 PM

1macker1

Aug 17, 2004, 02:19 PM

49 cents a downloads, man how can u not like this. This is what makes competition so great...lower prices for the consumer!!!

jettredmont

Aug 17, 2004, 02:22 PM

Not only that, I think 49cents is a very reasonable price for a music download, BECAUSE:

1) No physical distribution of CDs
2) No CDs. No cases. No cover linings.
3) Far more automated than a music store with rent, utility bills and staff.

The interesting thing is that you guys would be over the moon if Apple priced it's songs at 49c/each.

I agree 100%. Now, if someone besides Real did this, I'd gladly aid in their quarterly losses by buying out the store. But Real ... no, I just can't bring myself to be a part of their next "we had 200 downloads this month!" press release.

As for fairness of pricing ... Apple isn't making much of a profit off the iTMS, and none of the others are either. $.99 is just a few cents over break-even. Even without the equipment and connection costs, Apple only gets about $.30 in revenues per song sold. The only guys making serious money here, as it has always been, are the record companies. Until they loosen up their contracts, $.99 is about as good as you're going to get.

sfhc21

Aug 17, 2004, 02:22 PM

you really think 99cents is expensive? im all for lowering prices, but i have no tolerance for whiners who think 99cents is too much. get a job.

Greatness! Pure Greatness! Maybe you should think before you write stuff like this...

First of all, no one said 99 cents was expensive! Second of all, most logical people will agree that its better to get two songs for 99 cents instead of just one! Third of all, no one is whining! Many of us are looking at the positive side of this instead of just bashing Real...Fourth of all, I have a job!

SiliconAddict

Aug 17, 2004, 02:25 PM

Good for Real! Lower prices are good for the customer! I hope they do well, and then hopefully force Apple to lower their prices.

:D :D :D :D :D That is the ..... I mean how ....can you be?

Do you actually think for one nanosecond that .50 is a sustainable price?!?! Sure as heck Real is eating the other .50 out of pocket and sure as heck it won't last more then a few weeks. Real isn't exactly doing well financially. Doing this stunt is going to cause them to bleed money like an arterial hemorrhage and it sure isn't going to last long.
At any rate Apple isn't going to blink. .99 is the price music is going to stay at unless the RIAA decides to stop asking for what? I thought I had read around .60 out of a dollar goes to the RIAA. Could be wrong though.
At any rate I want to see them go down. This is dicking with someone else's creation. I don't care what "reason" they have. This is Apple's baby and the fact that Real went to Apple and made the offer then turned around with this BS speaks of a cheap ***, childish company.

frank5050

Aug 17, 2004, 02:27 PM

Supposing I had a PC and an iPod (I own neither), would RealPlayer allow me to play both Harmony and Apple FairPlay AACs? Because if not, then what would be the point of switching to RealPlayer--I'd lose all my ITMS songs. If I stick with iTunes on the PC, then the iPod deletes my RealPlayer songs. Unless Real has a fix for this, that's the real reason their strategy won't work.

Yes! This to me is the key. Everyone keeps focusing on Real's songs playing on the iPod but if I can't manage them with iTunes then forget it, I'm never going to use Real Player (or any other program I've tried to-date) to manage all of my music and I'm certainly not going to use two players to manage it. Although I know there are numerous people who don't care for the iTunes program I think it's the key to making Apple's strategy work.

SilentPanda

Aug 17, 2004, 02:28 PM

Hmmm.... according to Betterwhois.com, freedomofmusicchoice.COM is available...

*whistles innocently*

Chobit

Aug 17, 2004, 02:31 PM

There is a very clear reason that this whole thing is bad. The iPod remains the dominant player because of one thing: the user experince. This is everything from buying songs on iTMS to transferring them to the player, to listening to them. Apple's control over this experience, the reason they are a vertically integrated company, is why it is so seamless. Just like why the experience using OS X on a mac is so differenth than a windows box.

If Apple were to license Fairplay DRM, then iPod users could buy from many stores, but apple has no control over these stores. They could use lower bitrates, which would annoy some customers. They could just have a clunky, frustrating environment. They could even have problems where people buy songs, then the download doesn't work. This causes bumps in the iPod experience. What if someone in another store makes a mistake and breaks iPod compatibility. Customers start calling apple tech support. Apple can do nothing about this because it isn't their own product. The customer then gets mad and thinks Apple tech support is horrible! "why is my iPod such a POS?" they ask. Then they look for an alternative in their next digital music player.

By forcing open Apple's DRM scheme, real has made this situation even stickier for apple than in the above scenario. Apple has the choice to break their little haxie, but then the customers get confused and wonder why songs they thought should work won't. Apple's tech support gets a headache. If apple chooses not to break the haxie then we enter something like the above scenario, and another nightmare.

Apple is stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Here's hoping Apple comes up with a creative solution to this debacle that solves everything. Or that they can nick harmony completely before any damage is done.

superfunkomatic

Aug 17, 2004, 02:32 PM

i think one of the points that most are missing is the technology running the music. people will ultimately choose what works best for them. real has no "real" argument - people who want a "choice" will use their system, others will use other technologies. it isn't just one player, one format - any educated user knows there are several alternatives.

this is just typical ************ marketing. piss someone off for a reaction and free publicity. this is not a good long-term solution for Real. anyone with a few business courses knows that if you cut your price at the start of a business people are not likely going to stay with you when your prices go back to their normal level. in this case doubling, back to the "nasty, controlling, only choice of apple" prices of $1.

i think apple has done more thinking about this than people give them credit.

msconvert

Aug 17, 2004, 02:38 PM

Supposing I had a PC and an iPod (I own neither), would RealPlayer allow me to play both Harmony and Apple FairPlay AACs? Because if not, then what would be the point of switching to RealPlayer--I'd lose all my ITMS songs. If I stick with iTunes on the PC, then the iPod deletes my RealPlayer songs. Unless Real has a fix for this, that's the real reason their strategy won't work.

Who wants to manage two libraries! Brilliant. This is absolutly correct! Apple is all about ease of use. People who buy the iPod want to keep that ease of use. Real is doomed; Doomed I say!

(BTW. I don't think either company is going escalate the "war" to the point of deleting each others files.)

jettredmont

Aug 17, 2004, 02:42 PM

Erm.. Apple's BS about not making money off iTMS is just that, BS. Of course they want the money.

I don't think Apple has said they don't make any money on iTMS. However, their actual claim to make relatively little money on it, 1-2 cents per song in profit, is borne out by their most recent SEC filings and executive/analyst statements.

Are you suggesting Apple is BS'ing the SEC? Maybe you should put a concerned consumer call in; we wouldn't want Apple becoming the next Enron, would we?

While I'm not saying that the iPod is going to suddenly dead, it will not sell in these quantities. Margins will fall aswell.

Well, as a general truism, any product will trend towards commoditization or obsolescence. That results in a lowering of market share and of per-unit margins. So, yeah, I bet you're right.

Of course, that's not an "interesting" statement, as it doesn't give a timeframe, nor an analysis of whether Apple's current market share might give its own next-generation devices enough of a leg up that when this generation of device becomes commoditized they as a company retain market share. Note that within the mini-generations the iPod has already gone through, the commoditization and obsolescence factors were outweighed tremendously by overall market growth and customer loyalty, bringing about astounding year-over-year growth instead of decline. Do you see these failing soon? Do you see someone else in the industry usurping Apple's design-leadership role?

So, are you predicting that Apple will lose a substantial portion of portable music device market share within a year? Two years? What's your non-obvious claim?

Maxx Power

Aug 17, 2004, 02:43 PM

Apple has done nothing yet. But they could, because then THEY can profit from opening up their own product to others. I can understand that!

It's not at all like MS breaking non-MS software. The iPod is a closed system supporting certain things--Apple doesn't hide this, and the overall iTunes/iPod system actually makes a better product in some ways. And unlike Windows and third-party apps, the iPod was NEVER promoted as able to play third-party DRM downloads.

And of course you can rip to CD to remove ANY DRM anyway. (I recently tried this and can detect no loss... my friend thought she could tell the difference on one song... and she liked the re-ripped song better :D )

When a song is downloaded, you purchased the right to the music. This right is no different or differently excerised as the rights to a song you rip from a CD which you own. Being not able to listen to this song on a digital music player is wrong, the intention is clear, using the disguise of DRM to lock in market share. What's the difference between promoting your music device as being closed to obtain market share verses claiming a open system which doesn't look kindly to third party software ? They are worded differently but end exactly the same because they both are pathways for market share, the ultimate destination for any corporation (as well as getting filthy rich).

Re-ripping songs, or Transcoding, destroys sound quality. However, today's music is bloated with the vocal rage, lack of information. excessive clipping to boost preceived loudness, excessive bass. Today's sound is no art, it's engineering, more time is spent on computers "maximizing music" than spent in studio to record better. Take your average rock music from today for example, who would need equipment better than a set of Public Address speakers if the sound was originally produced by those speakers anyway ? Your quality of reproduction can not exceed the quality of the source. I wouldn't be surprised either if your average listeners can't find the difference between transcoded music and properly ripped music. In which case, i ask, why are these music from the music stores worth their money in cents in the first place ?

Motha-Canuker

Aug 17, 2004, 02:43 PM

well...we can no longer sign thier petition...or read it

all i can say is

HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAA

stupid real.

SilentPanda

Aug 17, 2004, 02:44 PM

There are a few problems with Real utilizing Apple's iPod to play their own music using DRM. If Real was simply selling unprotected AAC/MP3 files there really wouldn't be an issue. But here's the deal:

Real has in some fashion figured out a way to enable their DRM on the iPod. Since there is currently no cooperation between Apple and Real a problem can easily occur. Apple doesn't necessarily know how Real is doing this. I'm sure they have a notion but they don't know 100%. Similarly the people at the Hym Project do not know what DRM changes Apple will make to their music. Hence, every time that Apple updates iTunes or the iPod firmware, the Hymn project may have to update their program. Since the Hymn project is not legal to do, nobody can really complain about it (don't argue if the Hymn project is legal or not because that's not the point).

However, now you have Real coming into the picture. Real is selling songs that have DRM in them. If Apple makes even a *necessary* change to the iPod which inadvertantly creates problems for people who have downloaded from Real, then it will appear to be a problem with the iPod and something that Apple did intentionally. Now Apple (not Real) will start getting calls with people claiming their iPod is malfunctioning. This could cause Apple to be required to not alter certain aspects of the iPod in the future because the Real files will not work appropriately.

I think it just creates more of a hassle for Apple than anything else. I seriously doubt a good amount of people are even aware of the Real music store (I don't even know how to get to it) and I don't anticipate it lasting terribly long.

Mr_Ed

Aug 17, 2004, 02:51 PM

Someone just posted a new anti-Real petition as a comment on the Real petition site:

http://www.petitiononline.com/notreal/

The text on it is pretty straightforward.

jettredmont

Aug 17, 2004, 02:55 PM

oh, and in case they decide to pull the petition offline completely - I've copied a bit of it.

Mirror Page 1 (http://home.sport.rr.com/mrmudbug/mr/real/signed.cgi.html)
Mirror Page 2 (http://home.sport.rr.com/mrmudbug/mr/real/signed2.cgi.html)
Mirror Page 3 (http://home.sport.rr.com/mrmudbug/mr/real/signed3.cgi.html)
Mirror Page 4 (http://home.sport.rr.com/mrmudbug/mr/real/signed4.cgi.html)

there were plenty others - I figured this would give you a good taste of it all.

Phew! Good thing they took that down, or people might get a bunch of viruses in their email inboxes because of signing the petition (ref: note the reasoning displayed on the current petition as to why no names are shown in the list, just a number of "signatures".)

sinisterdesign

Aug 17, 2004, 02:57 PM

I really think some people on this thread have really got no brains if they don't use that thing in there called memory!

Was the iPod immediately available for windows? NO!
Was iTunes immediately available for PC? No!
Is Rhapsody immediately available for Mac? No.

Some people could even argue that some people here do NOT think before they speak!

Krohde

true, but was Apple preaching "FREEDOM OF MUSIC" and "standing up for their rights" and "stifling innovation"??? no. Real is just using this grassroots campaign to leech on iPod's popularity, nothing else.

IF (and this is a big "if") they allowed Mac users to download their $.49 tunes to my iPod, their "life, liberty and the pursuit of music" crap would ring a little more true.

Apple developed the hardware/software for THEIR customer base. when they saw the opportunity to expand their sales to the PC market, they did, but they never got all high & mighty about it saying they were doing it for noble reasons.

so go think for a little while, krohde...

BrianKonarsMac

Aug 17, 2004, 02:57 PM

49 cents won't seem like much of a bargain when Apple updates the iPod to break all songs from Real's site... you do realize they can play a never ending game of tennis - hacking and locking each other's software in a never ending competition.

why is everyone so against choice? i think it's appauling that apple claims to be the champion of open standards, but their most prized possession is anything but open.

we need to stop being blind mac zealots, step back, and actually look at what's going on. apple is fighting tooth and nail to maintain control over Fair Play, and it's quite obvious that Fair Play is VERY EASY to hack (note Hymn, it's predecessor, and Harmony). Apple can keep reworking Fair Play, but people will just continue to break it. rather than waste resources enforcing something that is unenforceable, they need to put their money where their mouth is, and be the champion of open standards.

nagromme

Aug 17, 2004, 02:57 PM

When a song is downloaded, you purchased the right to the music. This right is no different or differently excerised as the rights to a song you rip from a CD which you own.

Not true--you agree to certain terms with a download, courtesy of the RIAA. And even if a download WAS legally identical to ripping a CD... those terms are between you and the store, not you and the maker of your player.

Being not able to listen to this song on a digital music player is wrong, the intention is clear, using the disguise of DRM to lock in market share.

It's the RIAA (and the pirates) behind the need for DRM, not Apple. Apple should control their platform since they've never pretended otherwise--for lots of reasons people have stated here. But even if they don't beat Harmony, they'll STILL be on top by a mile. They have no need for DRM to lock in market share--they have the best product, and for once, they have the mindshare to go with that. Apple's market is secure. DRM is not some trick Apple's exploiting to promote an inferior player or jukebox. (Now, Real and Sony, on the other hand...)

nemaslov

Aug 17, 2004, 03:01 PM

Real will sell below cost for about three weeks and lose lotsa money but bring a few people over to an inferior product and site. You cannot give away the store and stay in business for too long. I'd rather pay a bit more with Apple and have them invest their profits to imporve their products-as Apple continually does.

Windowlicker

Aug 17, 2004, 03:03 PM

cheaper prices? if someone can't afford a dollar a song or 9.99 for a cd then they shouldn't be wasting $ on music.

well, you have a point there. I think 9.99 is pretty much the sweet spot for music, but I still would pay less if it was possible.

that said, seeing apple lower their prices a little bit here and there would make me go WOW, but I don't see that necessary for itms. the idea is that the artists get something too.

and what comes to the prices real has, the article also says the 0.49 is a campaign price. I don't believe they'll keep the price there, because then there would be no profit for real. for apple or sony or whatever this might still work since they sell their own mp3 players, but real doesn't sell hardware, only audio/video.

uzombie

Aug 17, 2004, 03:04 PM

You don't now how many times I've had to support user's machines after they installed Real Player. Or were duped into the G2 Real Player (when the links for the Free player were 6 point type!) for download. Or installed real Player and several Unwanted programs to their machine (ok, win users deserve this).

Real is trying hardball to get into something they feel they deserve. Apple found a niche and Real wants some.

Just install a Real program on your Mac or PC. It will take over playing of MP3s, jpegs, Mpegs, AVI,... only RAM is all you need it for.

Ask Real- why can't we have a choice in video on the web (when most news sites are RAM only!)? That was until we have MS WinMedia Player...now we can watch AVI files without Real.

Get Real?

adam1185

Aug 17, 2004, 03:04 PM

Here's the old petition it's still up

http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?r4apple&1

Not sure if anyone posted this in the past few pages

nagromme

Aug 17, 2004, 03:05 PM

i think it's appauling that apple claims to be the champion of open standards, but their most prized possession is anything but open.

No DRM is open. There's MS-controlled, Apple-controlled, Real-controlled, Sony-Controlled. Thank the RIAA for the need for DRM.

Where open computing standards exist, Apple often promotes and even enhances them.

That doesn't mean Apple can't make a unified system of iTunes/iPod/iTMS, nor that they ought to dillute that by giving away their DRM to all who ask. The day will come when turning the iPod into a chaos of different DRM stores may make sense. I'm guessing that day is not today.

And consider this: Apple CANNOT make their DRM open to other stores unless they are willing, forever, to make their iPod programmers/developers insure that all those OTHER stores will keep working. By keeping the iPod iTunes-only (plus CDs which are the vast majority of music buying) Apple doesn't have to spend R&D and support dollars until the end of time making sure whatever they feel like doing with future iPod features does not break other stores. They only have to deal with their own.

This is much like the headaches Apple avoids by not selling OS X for x86. Good business, and good for product stability.

BrianKonarsMac

Aug 17, 2004, 03:07 PM

im now officially embarrassed to be a mac user. i know lots of the people making these comments are older than me, but they sound like they are twelve year olds.

real realizes the ipod is #1. if you're not compatible with the ipod, you're nothing in digital music. they are a business, businesses need money. they are providing their customers what they need. i'm failing to see the negative in this? so we all hate real, what else is new, but this is an admirable piece of tech which should be embraced. WE SHOULD BE MAD AT APPLE FOR LOCKING US INTO THE ITMS! IT SUCKS MY BALLS! 128kbps AAC!?!?!? AHAHAHAHAHA! i have to buy my cd's (which are only $9.99 and include cover art, etc) then rip to lossless, a much better option than iTMS is currently.

macridah

Aug 17, 2004, 03:07 PM

If Real is losing money, wouldn't cutting their prices in half make them lose even more?

srobert

Aug 17, 2004, 03:10 PM

Someone just posted a new anti-Real petition as a comment on the Real petition site:

http://www.petitiononline.com/notreal/

The text on it is pretty straightforward.

Lol, that's funny. But what is funnier is that this opposed petition seems to grow faster than Real's one. (At least at the time I wrote this post)

BrianKonarsMac

Aug 17, 2004, 03:14 PM

No DRM is open. There's MS-controlled, Apple-controlled, Real-controlled, Sony-Controlled. Thank the RIAA for the need for DRM.

yes, but apple is in the position to make their DRM the only DRM that matters.

consider if you will apple licenses Fair Play to all the major music stores (what else is there other than iTMS, seriously?). Fair Play would become a standard, Apple would reap in large sums of cash, and they would be in control of the Fair Play standard. Anything they want to change, they are free to do so. All businesses licensing Fair Play would need to update to the new system.

Apple currently maintains backwards compatibility with previous versions of Fair Play, so what is to stop them from doing so in the future? If they changed features in the iTMS/iPod, i'm failing to see how this would break other music stores? As long as their files were encoded with Fair Play, they would work with iPod. Apple decides to update Fair Play, they give their customers the new version of it. What am i missing here?

If Real is losing money, wouldn't cutting their prices in half make them lose even more? they are hemorrhaging money like crazy. either they have plenty of cash in reserve, or mr. glaser is making a last ditch effort before his company says it's final farewells.

jettredmont

Aug 17, 2004, 03:14 PM

That makes sense, but that's hardly the case here. Real's files are technically superior to Apple's. Real sells 192 kbps AAC while Apple is selling 128. A 49 cent sale is icing on the cake. If Real publicizes it right, I don't see how they can't win from this.

Real files don't play in iTunes. Real files will all be deleted from the iPod the next time you sync up with iTunes (such as when you download the week's free song and want that on your iPod). Real files may force you to never update your iPod software again. IMHO, that's quite drastically technically inferior, and far outweighs the 192kbps encoding rate.

The only feasible route here is buying Real's 192kbps file, buring them onto CDs (adding a few cents per song to the overall cost) and ripping back out to unprotected AAC at around 128kbps quality (but with an actual bitrate of 192kbps so you don't compound the decoding glitches).

IMHO, that's a lot of work to get the tunes Real has that I want but don't have yet, at half price. Plus, I would get a really bad taste in my mouth and may have to waste an hour trying to get over that sickening feeling.

nagromme

Aug 17, 2004, 03:20 PM

consider if you will apple licenses Fair Play to all the major music stores (what else is there other than iTMS, seriously?). Fair Play would become a standard, Apple would reap in large sums of cash, and they would be in control of the Fair Play standard. Anything they want to change, they are free to do so. All businesses licensing Fair Play would need to update to the new system.

I agree--I just see lots of reasons why Apple would want to control the timing, licensing, and other details of such an opening of the iPod. I don't blame them for that.

JoePike

Aug 17, 2004, 03:25 PM

I haven't been a reader of MacRumors for too terribly long, but this has easily been the most entertaining thread I've seen thus far. I've been watching this most of the day today.....it's tough to imagine a more bizarre sequence of events with any greater comic value. :D I think my favorite part was the anti-Real petition petition, which I signed. I didn't get a chance to sign the original one set up by Real before the wimps took it down.

Sorry this hasn't been the most contributive message, just an observation.

Real blows. Their music shop will fold up sooner than later, but at least they've done something good in the meantime.....provide us with this bit of fun.

-Joe

Maxx Power

Aug 17, 2004, 03:33 PM

Not true--you agree to certain terms with a download, courtesy of the RIAA. And even if a download WAS legally identical to ripping a CD... those terms are between you and the store, not you and the maker of your player.

If those copyright terms are between you and the store, then why target my iPod and make it victim ? iPod should accept all formats of anti-copyrights by that logic. These so-called music should not have the ability to depict one player over another for playback. Afterall, some DVD's have DRM built in, but I don't see any brand of DVD players being able to play certain titles while others can't. In the absence of true standards, you can manipulate the DRM and argue anyotherwise that you are using it to protect this and that, when the ends don't justify the means.

It's the RIAA (and the pirates) behind the need for DRM, not Apple. Apple should control their platform since they've never pretended otherwise--for lots of reasons people have stated here. But even if they don't beat Harmony, they'll STILL be on top by a mile. They have no need for DRM to lock in market share--they have the best product, and for once, they have the mindshare to go with that. Apple's market is secure. DRM is not some trick Apple's exploiting to promote an inferior player or jukebox. (Now, Real and Sony, on the other hand...)

I agree with you. However, Apple should be with the CONSUMERS not the RIAA. Apple should have made iPod playback any title, and made iTMS without copyright constraints. That would be in good image and integrity, something Apple can't sell without. It is in this north american world of ours that we seccumb to whatever choices offered to us, since that's how capitalistic systems work, but we can easily do better, there is no real limits on why we can not have a DRM free music store, or a player that does what it should, play music and nothing more or have 118 miles per gallon for our cars, Volkswagen Lupo 3L TDi had that in the 1980's. The only stumbling blocks are artificial, for example "why fix it when we already make profit ?" or "no other corporations are doing it, we're just along for the ride." in this anti-competitive society, as much as we claim it is competitive, is only competitive enough to offer you things of very minimal differences. They have a certain style of jeans, so we make them a little different, they have iTMS so we make Sony Music store, offering despite the minute differences, what is essentially the same in the end. Just look at those average north american cars, with same kinds of contours, gas mileage, and look at all those mass marketed PC's, HP, Dell, Gateway, you name it, all with practically the same innards and superficial differences. If competitiveness got us to where we are, then why do most of us dress alike ? Blue Jeans, Tee-Shirts ? Human natures is starting to show its ugly head protected by swarms of lawyers, politicians, corporations with massive funds, and economic oppression (the inability to do anything about anything unless you have money). Anyways....

denm316

Aug 17, 2004, 03:37 PM

srobert

Aug 17, 2004, 03:39 PM

...i know lots of the people making these comments are older than me, but they sound like they are twelve year olds....

WE SHOULD BE MAD AT APPLE FOR LOCKING US INTO THE ITMS! ... have to buy my cd's ... rip to lossless, a much better option than iTMS is currently.

Not to be picky (well, maybe a little) but it seems you are contradicting yourself... and adults should refrain from using potty mouth words such as "SUCKS MY BALLS" and also refrain from yelling in a public area (Caps) ;)

jchen

Aug 17, 2004, 03:42 PM

"Apple's Jobs, RealNetworks's Glaser Meet, Debate, Food Fight At Palo Alto's MacArthur Park"
http://www.mac360.com/index.php/mac360/more/apples_jobs_reals_glaser_meet_debate_fight_at_macarthur_park

"Online Music Battle Escalates: Real Acts of Desperation Against Apple, Targets iPod Owners"
http://www.mac360.com/index.php/mac360/more/real_acts_of_desperation_against_apple_ipod_owners

"Point - Counterpoint: Apple Should Open The iPod, iTunes Music"
http://www.mac360.com/index.php/mac360/more/point_counterpoint_apple_should_open_the_ipod_itunes_music

Wonder Boy

Aug 17, 2004, 03:43 PM

Greatness! Pure Greatness! Maybe you should think before you write stuff like this...

First of all, no one said 99 cents was expensive! Second of all, most logical people will agree that its better to get two songs for 99 cents instead of just one! Third of all, no one is whining! Many of us are looking at the positive side of this instead of just bashing Real...Fourth of all, I have a job!

I am pure greatness. thank you for noticing. :p

sinisterdesign

Aug 17, 2004, 03:43 PM

...this has easily been the most entertaining thread I've seen thus far.

true. i think it's very interesting how divisive this topic is, even amongst the Mac-faithful!

It's the RIAA (and the pirates) behind the need for DRM, not Apple. Apple should control their platform since they've never pretended otherwise--for lots of reasons people have stated here. ... DRM is not some trick Apple's exploiting to promote an inferior player or jukebox. (Now, Real and Sony, on the other hand...)

THANK you. it's Apple's product. they didn't devise DRM just to piss people off and lock them into iTMS. if they want to open up Fairplay, awesome, but they should make that choice and not have their hand forced by Real's hacker tactics. "oh, we think you should open up your product, so we did it for you."

nagromme

Aug 17, 2004, 03:44 PM

Apple should have made iPod playback any title, and made iTMS without copyright constraints.

The iTunes Store would simply never have happened. Apple could never have done that--they need the blessing of music owners. Sad but true. Blame the RIAA and the pirates. Honest consumers are caught in the middle--and nothing Apple could do could have changed that.

Making iTMS music copyright-free was never remotely possible. Neither was making it DRM-free.

Playback of "any" title, too, is impossible. Sony controls their 8TRAC format, for instance, and Real controls their own DRM--just like Apple controls their Fairplay implementation.

The others (Windows Media Audio stores) would love to have total control too... but they gave that control to Microsoft instead.

--------

In other news, there is at least SOME humor to be found in the original comments on Real's original petition. Click "30" to see the very first comments made:

http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?r4apple

And now Real has replaced that with "r4apple2" which accepts comments but does not display them.

What do you want to bet that Real actually announces how many signatures this new petition got in support? Even though the vast majority of them are surely from people just flaming, not realizing their comments would be hidden :D

mjtomlin

Aug 17, 2004, 03:45 PM

Apple doesn't need to worry about what Real has done... all they need to do is, on the side of the iPod box, write, "this iPod is only FULLY compatible with the following music formats; MP3, WAV, ACC, AIFF, Apple Lossless, and music purchased online from the iTunes Music Store."

Then if someone wants to run to Real's site and buy music, they can't complain if it no longer plays at some point in the future. Apple never guaranteed it would work in the first place.

Just because Real says it's compatible, doesn't mean that Apple has to make sure the iPod remains so. The only time this would ever apply, is if Apple licenses FairPlay to a company. If Real wants to reverse engineer FairPlay, well then they're on their own in regards to making sure it stays compatible with future versions.

More power to Real if they can pull it off. I seriously doubt it though.

blybug

Aug 17, 2004, 03:51 PM

Chomolungma

Aug 17, 2004, 03:53 PM

When a song is downloaded, you purchased the right to the music. This right is no different or differently excerised as the rights to a song you rip from a CD which you own. Being not able to listen to this song on a digital music player is wrong, the intention is clear, using the disguise of DRM to lock in market share. What's the difference between promoting your music device as being closed to obtain market share verses claiming a open system which doesn't look kindly to third party software ? They are worded differently but end exactly the same because they both are pathways for market share, the ultimate destination for any corporation (as well as getting filthy rich).

Re-ripping songs, or Transcoding, destroys sound quality. However, today's music is bloated with the vocal rage, lack of information. excessive clipping to boost preceived loudness, excessive bass. Today's sound is no art, it's engineering, more time is spent on computers "maximizing music" than spent in studio to record better. Take your average rock music from today for example, who would need equipment better than a set of Public Address speakers if the sound was originally produced by those speakers anyway ? Your quality of reproduction can not exceed the quality of the source. I wouldn't be surprised either if your average listeners can't find the difference between transcoded music and properly ripped music. In which case, i ask, why are these music from the music stores worth their money in cents in the first place ?

I think you have many good points, however, to suggest that today's rock music is bloated and has excessive bass among others is absolutely a subjective opinion. If there is a such thing as subjective opinion :D . I think most genre of music needs to be on the cutting edge. We may not understand and appreciate new music just as we sometime do not appreciate cutting edge abstract art. Nonetheless, in due time, the bad new music will fade, and the good music will be incorporated into our culture. think of the alternative? What if rock cutting edge artist of today is e.g. the Rolling Stone. the like the Stones, but I don't think they are pusing the standard like they once had. Just my two cents.

Chomo

kerb

Aug 17, 2004, 03:56 PM

that is just scraping the lowest point of a very low barrel

swissmann

Aug 17, 2004, 03:56 PM

After reading the two updates I had to say to myself - "Nice one, Real". Way to cover things up. I'm liking them less and less.

srobert

Aug 17, 2004, 03:56 PM

Just because Real says it's compatible, doesn't mean that Apple has to make sure the iPod remains so. The only time this would ever apply, is if Apple licenses FairPlay to a company. If Real wants to reverse engineer FairPlay, well then they're on their own in regards to making sure it stays compatible with future versions.

More power to Real if they can pull it off. I seriously doubt it though.

Indeed. I can kind of picture iPod-users-Real-songs-purchasers having to go through... "that time of the month".

"That time of the month" is a 3-6 day period that Real Networks music buyers have to go through every month. During this period, their Real songs won't play on their newly updated iPods. They become very irascible, until the end of the period, marked by a new (monthly) Real Network software update. Companions of the Real songs purchasers have to be very understanding of what their companion is going through.

Well... that was just for fun. No offense intended to anyone.

sinisterdesign

Aug 17, 2004, 03:58 PM

Afterall, some DVD's have DRM built in, but I don't see any brand of DVD players being able to play certain titles while others can't.

have you heard of region coding? most every DVD player made (i said "most") only plays DVDs of one region. in fact, pop a DVD from Europe into your Mac and see if your DVD player doesn't want you to lock in a region. the MPAA requires this so i don't start selling my DVDs on eBay in China (and i'm sure there are a hundred other reasons, but for simplicity sake).

I agree with you. However, Apple should be with the CONSUMERS not the RIAA. Apple should have made iPod playback any title, and made iTMS without copyright constraints.

what utopia do you live in?? <sarcasm>yeah, and Apple should have just bought all the music at their local Sam Goody, ripped it to their servers and offered it free to any iPod owner.</sarcasm> somehow i think the RIAA had a say in what copyright constraints THEIR music came with. i think Apple did a pretty good job negotiating fair usage rights.

nagromme

Aug 17, 2004, 04:05 PM

So I figured I'd fire up Virtual PC and try out Real's store, maybe download a song or two (mostly to see if the next iPod update evaporates them)...check out the fine print that comes up on the graphic during the Real Player download:

These guys really have alot of nerve.

I hope that's a Photoshop joke :D

The silly Apple-buddy-talk aside, if Real's fine print has the phrase "various things" and that bad grammar ("the use hereby RealNetworks")... then I'm thinking Real can't even afford lawyers :D

sinisterdesign

Aug 17, 2004, 04:07 PM

hmmm, i didn't realize they serve beer in court..

blybug

Aug 17, 2004, 04:09 PM

I hope that's a Photoshop joke :D

No joke...I'd be funnier than that if I were going to take the time to make a PhotoShop.:D

It's a direct screen capture from VPC as I downloaded and installed the WinXP RealPlayer. Get on a Windows machine and see for yourself. How low can these guys go?

nagromme

Aug 17, 2004, 04:11 PM

The fairly obvious only just sunk in for me: Real/Harmony songs are NOT fully iPod compatible.

Apparently if you use Real songs, you CANNOT use them with iTunes. So you lose access to your existing iTMS music (meaning most legal downloads that have ever been bought). And you lose the use of a great jukebox app for managing your library.

But more to the point, you CAN NO LONGER USE THE FULL FEATURES OF THE IPOD. Lots of the features that make the iPod a great player have to do with tying in to your library on your computer--including many iTunes-only features. Like support for editing On The Go playlists, Smart Playlists, ratings, etc. etc. etc. etc.

In other words, using Harmony cripples your iPod. (As iPod users--who are nearly all iTunes jukebox users--will notice right away and not be happy!)

FYI here are comments from the cross-platform iPodLounge community:

http://www.ipodlounge.com/ipodnews_comments.php?id=4734_0_7_0_C

I don't think it's JUST "Mac zealots" who have something against Real's products :)

Mr.Hey

Aug 17, 2004, 04:19 PM

http://www.petitiononline.com/notreal/petition.html

To:* RealNetworks Inc.

We, The Undersigned, believe the Real should cancel their latest publicity stunt: http://www.freedomofmusicchoice.org/ which seems to be an entirely self-centered move to keep themselves in the Music Download business rather than (as it purports to be) an act of Consumer-driven expression. We also believe that Real's move to cancel their previous petition by adding another without comments seems to be stifling some consumers' voices in choosing a different download service, which seems rather at odds to their supposed message.

We do not necessarily believe that there should not be freedom of consumer choice in music is wrong or that projects such as Hymn are morally or legally corrupt but feel that Real is choosing a shameless stunt geared towards their own ends rather than somehow championing the consumer.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

:D :D :D :D :D

Capn_Moho

Aug 17, 2004, 04:26 PM

I happen to agree with Real's statement. Of course the thinlly veiled intent behind it I am opposed to.

ATTENTION! Apple does not strive to make money! Why would you insinuate such a horrible thing?!

Also, I can count the amount of spyware that the latest RealPlayer beta installed on my Mac on the fingers of my left kidney. Given that Real doesn't offer Rhapsody for the Mac, why would Real want to release a product to such an unforgiving crowd?

I'd say some more, but that kind of language isn't allowed here. But, "like dimwitted chickens with their heads cut off" sounds appropriate.

MacMyDay

Aug 17, 2004, 04:31 PM

I can't help but laugh so much at this thread.

I've been a Mac user for 2 years. I've been using Windows since 3.1. Never, ever did I openly install Real crap onto any machine, due to it being so ****e. So it shall continue. But due to the entertainment factor, I'm almost glad they did it now.

inkswamp

Aug 17, 2004, 04:32 PM

Good for Real! Lower prices are good for the customer! I hope they do well, and then hopefully force Apple to lower their prices. Thats a fat chance, but I like to dream...

Do you really think lower prices for consumers is Real's motivation or do you think lining their pockets with some of Apple's hard-earned innovation is the motive. I have a guess. I have no problem with Apple keeping this goodie to themselves. They practically invented this market--a market that others repeatedly claimed wasn't there, couldn't be done. Now all the nay-sayers want a slice of it. Too bad.

And you know, for the most part, I think companies using the DMCA to thwart this kind of move is ridiculous, Apple no exception, but at the same time I have to say to Real (and every other tech company out there): Come up with your own great ideas instead of latching on to the ideas of others.

I mean, isn't that what companies in the tech sector, like Real, claim is so great about their sphere? Isn't innovation the Holy Grail of the tech world? So, Real, take your guys off trying to gang-hump iTunes and start brainstorming for your own Great Idea that everyone else in the world will come rushing to. It's not like they haven't had opportunities.

At one point Real had a serious head-start on everyone else in terms of streaming audio and video technology. I remember the first time I used Real to listen to streaming audio and watch streaming video. I was blown away and everyone else played catch-up with them for a while. Remember that?

Real should have been the ones to create the iTunes music store and the software and maybe even the iPod, but they squandered their lead. Now they want to latch on to the company who beat them at their own game? Too late. Get over it, stop embarrassing yourselves and move on to something else. And stop hiding behind this disingenuous claims of concern for the consumer. If they were genuinely concerned for consumers, Real would never have let their products become as crappy as they currently are and would never have tried coasting for as long as they did.

nagromme

Aug 17, 2004, 04:34 PM

My crystal ball tells me how this will end:

1. Some hacker figures out how to use Harmony to break DRM.

2. The RIAA kills Harmony and Apple comes out squeaky clean :)

Fender2112

Aug 17, 2004, 04:38 PM

Kind of ironic don't think ...

shamino

Aug 17, 2004, 04:40 PM

Does iTunes or iPod software automatically update on PCs? It doesn't on Macs.

If not, what's to stop someone from simply not downloading the inevitable update from Apple breaking Real's format?
Nothing. But it's not a viable long-term solution.

Apple releases updates for a wide variety of reasons. Bug fixes, new features, better power management, new CODECs, etc.

If you choose to not upgrade anymore, you miss out on all this. Recent updates included longer battery life and support for the Apple Lossless codec. It is likely that future updates will add other useful things. Which you won't get if you never upgrade it.

sinisterdesign

Aug 17, 2004, 04:40 PM

Real should have been the ones to create the iTunes music store and the software and maybe even the iPod, but they squandered their lead. Now they want to latch on to the company who beat them at their own game? Too late. Get over it, stop embarrassing yourselves and move on to something else. And stop hiding behind this disingenuous claims of concern for the consumer. If they were genuinely concerned for consumers, Real would never have let their products become as crappy as they currently are and would never have tried coasting for as long as they did.

can i buy you a beer? beautifully stated...

GFLPraxis

Aug 17, 2004, 04:43 PM

Quick, everyone buy music from Real!

With those prices, they're probably taking a loss on every song, so we can help them along and break the bank :)

GFLPraxis

Aug 17, 2004, 04:44 PM

Kind of ironic don't think ...

No Mac support?
Burn, Real, burn!!!

Grr.

Trekkie

Aug 17, 2004, 05:07 PM

Actually I think the petition shows how pathetic Apple zealots can be.

If this were Apple doing the very same thing to another competitor who had a lock on the market you would all be behind Apple cheering. Another win for the "little guy" as everyone says. It really stings when it's turned around on Apple.

I've used, administered, developed on OSX, BSD, Linux, Solaris, and Windows and have had experience will the zealots of each platform. It's amazing how all of the Apple zealots sound just like the Windows ones you trash all of the time. In the end you are all alike, just behind what each considers a winning solution.

I'm with you on the zealots comment, but getting behind apple vs. getting behind a company that creates a 'free the music' site making it look like apple keeps you from using the iPod the way 'you' want to, not just keeping them from selling you something....

obiwan

Aug 17, 2004, 05:08 PM

I've just been reading some of the comments on that (now pulled) petition. - That's the funniest thing I've seen in ages! - I think REAL know they're going down, but they just wanted to do it in style...

Localcelebrity

Aug 17, 2004, 05:09 PM

How can RealNetworks afford to charge so little for song downloads? Surely they're taking a loss on this marketing promotion? Also, there's the Apple factor - how will Apple react to this news (both in their music store and regarding FairPlay itself)? I don't see how this will help Real, unless it means that their customer count more than doubles because of it - which I think is unlikely.

guy's he's right, remember how apple only gets to keep about 10 cents on every song, i don't think real got any better of a deal than apple did, they have to be doing this at a loss and banking on getting people hooked on their system, so all of these sales are going to be at a loss

so help kill real, download as much music as you can while the offer exists and never buy from them again, burn all the stuff to disc, re-import it into itunes and leave real to foot the other 49 cents of the bill on every song.

Cheap music for us, money for the record industry and a huge loss for real if we do this right.

matthew24

Aug 17, 2004, 05:12 PM

SandyL

Aug 17, 2004, 05:14 PM

FairPlay: Another Anticompetitive Use of DRM (http://blogs.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/001557.php)
On a panel a few weeks ago, I asked the head lawyer for Apple's iTunes Music Store whether Apple would, if it could, drop the FairPlay DRM from tracks purchased at the Music Store. He said "no." I was puzzled, because I assumed that the DRM obligation was imposed by the major labels on a grudging Apple.

Superhob

Aug 17, 2004, 05:20 PM

In case no one saw this:

Cnet's daily buzz:
_________________________________________________________________
"Real, Apple, low prices--oh, my!
Creating technology that cracks iPod encryption and makes RealNetworks' downloadable music compatible with the player: superexpensive. Selling downloadable songs for 49 cents and albums at half price: big-time money loser. Marketing the Harmony technology and the cheap songs: again, mucho moolah. Watching Apple go absolutely ballistic? Priceless."
_________________________________________________________________
Why are there so many apple haters out there? Is it pure jealousy or what...

By the way, I hate real too and I've made it a point to always uninstall their software on any PC I work on.

munkle

Aug 17, 2004, 05:20 PM

I've already posted this in another thread, so please forgive the double posting but after reading all the comments I just wanted to say the same again :)

Harmony is not going to help sell more iPods. Behind all the pro choice talk Harmony is simply an attempt to sell more songs from Real to iPod users. There's nothing wrong with this of course, it's just common sense for Real to want to do this.

What is objectionable is their 'choice for the consumer' campaign, when all Real is trying to do is to lock users into their proprietary format instead of Apple's proprietary format. The fact that Harmony is only compatible with Windows is just too much irony for me too handle!

The iPod gives you a lot of freedom of choice, more so than most players, just not when it comes to rival DRM platforms. But what makes the iPod such a great music player is the package of iTunes, iTunes Music Store, Airport Express etc, that comes with the iPod. It's this close quality control which makes the iPod a superior user experience. Apple has shown that it is willing to collabrate with partners, as demonstrated with the HP deal, but only with companies that are going to bring something to the table, Real obviously do not fall into this category.

The only company to gain from Reals' Harmony is Real. In fact iPod users will suffer if they use Harmony, as they will not be able to continue using iTunes to control all their music.

But there is a lot at stake here - namely DRM Music. Whilst Apple might be making money from the sale of iPods rather than purchases from the iTunes Music Store currently in the future it's going to be hard to maintain the same level of success and profit margins. The download music industry on the otherhand is in very early stages and is likely to become a huge industry in the future. At the moment Apple are poised to become the market leader and industry standard. There's a lot more at stake than just what songs will play on the iPod.

shamino

Aug 17, 2004, 05:20 PM

yes, but apple is in the position to make their DRM the only DRM that matters.
FairPlay achieved this position, not because of anything special about iTunes, the iPod or AAC. They got there by having the most liberal DRM policy in the industry - 3 (later 5) computers, unlimited CD burns (10, later 7 per playlist) and unlimited iPods.

Everybody else, including Real, is so restrictive that nobody wants to touch it. They sport "features" like rental-only (stop paying your monthly bill and everything stops playing), tied to only one computer (with no ability to transfer the license when you buy new equipment), very limited CD burning (often none, or less than 5 burns total, etc.

In comparison, RealRhapsody is charging you a $10/mo subscription fee. Stop paying and your songs all stop working. The songs don't work with iTunes, or any player other than Real's (even though they have a hack to let them be loaded into an iPod.) Their web site doesn't say what other DRM constraints are imposed by their player, but I'm certain they're just as restrictive as Napster's and everybody else's.

Opening up FairPlay won't help Real one iota, because Real is still imposing insanely-stupid license terms on their music. iTMS is suceeding because of its liberal DRM, not because it's the only iPod-compatible DRM.

If Apple started imposing draconian DRM, the way everybody else does, iTMS would lose all of its customers. And by that same token, if Real, or any of the others would start selling music with DRM terms as liberal as Apple's, you would find that they'd start selling as much music as Apple - which may even boost the sales of portable players.

But they're not doing this, and they probably never will, so they'll remain a pointless bit-player in the market. No amount of hacking the iPod and making threatening noises to the press is going to make the public buy something they don't want.

mohaukachi

Aug 17, 2004, 05:22 PM

i have access to a pdf of the upcoming ad. i need someone to host it for me. please email me ONLY if you can host the ad to shed more light on this story.
mohaukachi@hotmail.com

kp

obiwan

Aug 17, 2004, 05:24 PM

Apple is abusing it's market position and the blind support of many Apple followers is just shameful. The only reason Apple is still alive is because of open standards. If IBM (stop producing PowerPC as a concurrent) and M$ (MSOffice) will (or would have) tread Apple in the same way as Apple treads Real, Apple will soon be history.:

I don't see how Apple is abusing it's market position - it hasn't done anything wrong. It invented FairPlay so they have the right to license it or not if they so wish. If anything, Apple's market position is where it is with the iPod, because on this occassion they've done everything right. A closed system isn't necessarily all bad - they have created tight integration with the iPod, iTunes and the Music Store which is why they've been so successfull - if they opened it up and let Real and Microsoft get their hands on it, it could mess the whole thing up. Apple create closed products, because they believe they can produce the best possible product this way. Microsoft create closed standards because they want to make more money and stifle the competition - that's the difference. Real just want a slice of Apple's cake, plain and simple.

blybug

Aug 17, 2004, 05:25 PM

After much registering, downloading, updating, multiple window spawning, crashing of WindowsXP within Virtual PC, giving of my credit card info to Real (eek!), and slow-as-all-get-out song downloading, I have successfully (oops not yet, Windows just crashed again) downloaded the "free" tryout song "A Texas Sunday - Too Much Joy" from the Real Music store.

Their software is really bizarre...it seems you can access the music store from http://musicstore.real.com like a web page, but then it randomly and abruptly moves you into the RealPlayer application which when updated for Rhapsody becomes a very cluttered and cartoony iTunes ripoff (http://www.bly.cc/realstore.jpg) with menus to access the Store, your Library, your Purchased Music, Radio, etc, on the left panel, which show up on the right side window.

So I thought I had downloaded the song from the web page, but it's not showing up in my RealPlayer. Arrgh. OK, I'm going to try to download it from directly within RealPlayer ala iTunes...tells me I already bought it...so where is it?? I'll buy it again...here it comes, again taking forever on my DSL, about 7 minutes for this one 5.6MB song...

waiting...waiting...99%...now it's stuck on the "Confirming Download" step...WindowsXP crashes & restarts again...WindowsXP crashes again upon starting RealPlayer...I've just downloaded the same song (http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewAlbum?playlistId=6673101&selectedItemId=6673058) from iTunes just on principle. Not that good of a song really.

Finally the song shows up in my RealPlayer!! And WindowsXP crashes again when I try to play it. Restarting Windows...this time I drag the file from My Music folder onto my Mac desktop. Has a .rax extension, and shows up like a TextEdit file. Dragging it into iTunes does nothing. Manually dragging it to a playlist on my iPod in iTunes does nothing. Dragging it into Hymn...oooh oooh - turned it into an m4a on my Desktop...but it isn't really. Does nothing. How about RealPlayer for OS X? File opens, tells me I need to download and install Helix DRM plugin (I do this - who knew this was available for the Mac??)...RealPlayer seems to now recognize the file and dispays the name of the song at the top of the window then tells me this computer (my Mac as opposed to my crashedy-crash Virtual PC) is not authorized, to authorize it sign into my Music Store account...I do this...then finally I'm informed this platform is not supported.:mad:

One more try playing it in Windows RealPlayer...crash...

Maybe all the problems are just a Virtual PC thing (though I've found Virtual PC to much more stable in most cases than a real PC), but I'm giving up. After all the only reason I'm doing this is to see how much it sucks, and I've pretty much proven that already...

0 and A ai

Aug 17, 2004, 05:27 PM

jragosta

Aug 17, 2004, 05:28 PM

Since Real yanked the petition that allows comments, send your comments to:
admin@freedomofmusicchoice.org

Of course, I'm sure they won't learn anything, but it's still worth telling them how much they're pissing off potential customers.

jragosta

Aug 17, 2004, 05:31 PM

True, but I believe that 49c is a fairer price than 99c. I don't see why you'd pay the same amount for a lossy-compressed 128k AAC when you can get a full CD for $9.99. Obviously it's connivence, but I purchase CDs when I can and keep itunes for one or two songs I like.

Simply because the people who own it set the price. Apple says that their licensing fees are $0.69 per track. If that's what the people who own the music want to charge, that's the price. Apple charges $0.30 more for technology, marketing, and a (tiny) profit.

If you don't like it, your choices are to not buy the music or make your own.

Real's price is artificially low. They've admitted that they're losing money. There's no way I'd get locked into a technology where everyone knows the price is going to go back up next month. Not to mention the probability that Apple will break harmony and the possibility that Real will go out of business with their stupid stunts.

Why don't they take the money they're losing on this stunt and invest it in coming up with a good product rather than hacking Apple's?

jragosta

Aug 17, 2004, 05:33 PM

Oh dear. Have you heard something of a contract? It basically assures both parties that they will do whatever they said.

The RIAA could pull out now, but they'd incur huge penalties.

Really? Do you know what the contract says? If not, you can't make that statement.

munkle

Aug 17, 2004, 05:33 PM

jragosta

Aug 17, 2004, 05:37 PM

Real's procedure is certainly open to criticism but I think the iPod should reflect what Apple has been preaching about for some time now : open standards and better interoperability with others. The bottom line is that the customer doesn't care where the songs come from and what format they are.

The iPod DOES support open standards.

You can use iTunes to rip an industry standard, open standards CD if you want.

Or, you can use open standards MP3 files if you want.

The only thing that's closes is Apple's proprietary, OPTIONAL, AAC format. If you don't like it, don't use it. The iPod is every bit as functional without it.

jragosta

Aug 17, 2004, 05:42 PM

Real can't possibly make any kind of profit off of this.

If I were Apple, I would let Real break the bank selling all these songs for $0.49 and after a few weeks when Real has lost a ton of $$$, I'd update the iPod to make it not compatible with Real's music and Real's service.

That would be a slap in the face, and might send Real under.

If I were Real, I would update the iPod's software, so you could no longer update your iPod from Apple. (assuming that this is possible)

Only time will tell who will win. heheh.... :D

How about this:

When Apple sells you a song, they immediately buy that song from Real. The record companies get their license fee (from Real) and Apple saves $0.20 per song.

At a million songs per week, that would cost Real some real money.

shamino

Aug 17, 2004, 05:44 PM

The only thing that's closes is Apple's proprietary, OPTIONAL, AAC format. If you don't like it, don't use it. The iPod is every bit as functional without it.
AAC is not proprietary. It's part of the MPEG-4 spec. Anybody who wants a license for it can get one. There are non-Apple products that support AAC, including some portable players (by Panasonic, if you're interested.)

Apple's FairPlay DRM wrapper around AAC is what's proprietary.

Non-DRM AAC (like what you get when you rip a CD in iTunes) can be played on third-party devices without any problem. And Apple's software (iTunes and iPod) have no problem playing non-DRM AAC files produced by third-party products.

Loge

Aug 17, 2004, 05:46 PM

FairPlay achieved this position, not because of anything special about iTunes, the iPod or AAC. They got there by having the most liberal DRM policy in the industry - 3 (later 5) computers, unlimited CD burns (10, later 7 per playlist) and unlimited iPods.

Exactly. iTMS is the only store I've seen that presents the DRM as a positive right there on the Apple web site - "Generous Personal Use Rights". Every other store seems to try to hide it in the small print. This is important, as the key to successful sales of online content is to convince consumers that they have bought something of value.

whooleytoo

Aug 17, 2004, 05:47 PM

Oh dear. Have you heard something of a contract? It basically assures both parties that they will do whatever they said.

The RIAA could pull out now, but they'd incur huge penalties.

As far as I can recall, it's a 3 year deal. If the RIAA think they can do better with a more open digital music market, I presume they can pull the plug at that stage (April 2006).

crookedcharlie

Aug 17, 2004, 05:50 PM

Just a few thoughts off of the top of my head...

Cool, Real is interested in open standards now. Awesome. I assume they'll not stop suing small shareware makers who create programs to pickup and record Real .rm streams. In fact, maybe Apple should implement .rm streaming into the next version of Quicktime. I mean, Real should really open that format up. Who cares if they want to or not. Competition is good! Let's see if we can't find a way for Quicktime to pick up Real streams from "Gold sites" without paying! After all, Real is the CHAMPION OF CHOICE!!!

I honestly don't think anyone should care about Harmony, but I also think that anyone who complains after the first ipod update cripples it is a fool. Apple has said that they can't be help responsible for this, and Real sure as hell won't take responbility when the tracks stop working. Seriously, don't come crying to us. You know it's going to happen ahead of time, so don't be a fool.

How is the ipod a closed system? Can't people play mp3's on it? Why isn't real going after Sony's new player? Theirs is a completely closed system, and yet Real doesn't want a piece of that pie. Odd...

I will never, EVER trust a company that offers a sale when they first open. Call me what you will, but that is what DRUG DEALERS DO! "First one's free, kid..."

jragosta

Aug 17, 2004, 05:55 PM

You may think about Real anyway you like but:

Apple is abusing it's market position and the blind support of many Apple followers is just shameful. The only reason Apple is still alive is because of open standards. If IBM (stop producing PowerPC as a concurrent) and M$ (MSOffice) will (or would have) tread Apple in the same way as Apple treads Real, Apple will soon be history.

Until recently I was somewhat proud to be a member of the Mac community, I did think that we had higher standards than the 'dark' side. I am painfully mistaken.

Moderator: Please remove my account and all my posts from this board. :mad:

Sure. What a terrible shame.

Apple develops a superior product and it becomes a smash success. They object to some worthless, crapware company stealing their technology and marketing a product that disables Apple's own superior product.

How evil for Apple to want to benefit from their own products.....

SilvorX

Aug 17, 2004, 05:57 PM

someone needs to send spam to scott sutherland (the admin of freedomofmusicchoice.org)
admin@freedomofmusicchoice.org

jragosta

Aug 17, 2004, 05:58 PM

i've never met a windows zealot.

Then you haven't opened your eyes.

There are millions of people out there campaigning for Apple to be squashed.

Unfortunately, many of them are MIS managers.

outerspaceapple

Aug 17, 2004, 05:58 PM

I say... SKREW REAL NETWORKS, NOBODY LIKES THEM ANYWAY. WHY DON'T YOU JUST CURL UP AND DIE YOU BAG OF FLAMING DOG ****

so anyways, who's with me?

inkswamp

Aug 17, 2004, 06:06 PM

Apple is abusing it's market position and the blind support of many Apple followers is just shameful.

Hold on a second. Apple isn't abusing anything. They went forward into a market that just about everyone on the planet, including a lot of people posting here, said was foolish. They did so at great expense and at great potential embarrassment to themselves should it have failed. They developed the iTunes, the store, the iPod; they negotiated probably pricey agreements with music labels; they sell songs, paying for the massive bandwidth, and just about break-even. They dumped cash into the R&D for this and they did it right and made a massive success out of something that everyone else had written off largely because nobody thought the P2P networks could be beaten.

And now, because Apple doesn't want to let lazy competitors in on that for almost nothing, you think that "abusing its market position?" Get off your high horse. If Apple had appropriated all these great ideas from a little company and used its influence and power to take over things and lock everyone into their standards, then you would have a legitimate gripe, but where are you coming from with this? Apple did ALL OF THIS on their own. It's their pie. And it's wrong because they won't let Real have a free slice of it? What did Real do to earn a seat at the table? Nothing.

The only reason Apple is still alive is because of open standards. If IBM (stop producing PowerPC as a concurrent) and M$ (MSOffice) will (or would have) tread Apple in the same way as Apple treads Real, Apple will soon be history.

That's terribly over-simplified and it implies that the iPod/iTunes combo is a closed system. It's not. Until the day comes that I can't play mp3s or import CDs into it, then your complaint is meaningless. Look at Sony's music player that ONLY plays ATRAC and then tell me the iPod/iTunes system is a closed one. Please!

Until recently I was somewhat proud to be a member of the Mac community, I did think that we had higher standards than the 'dark' side. I am painfully mistaken. Moderator: Please remove my account and all my posts from this board.

Good riddance! You take things a too seriously as it is. It sounds like you need to spend less time in front of a computer and maybe a little more time outdoors anyway. :rolleyes:

Porchland

Aug 17, 2004, 06:12 PM

Moderator: Please remove my account and all my posts from this board. :mad:

Drama queen.

jmonteiro

Aug 17, 2004, 06:21 PM

If you do not like the fact that Real removed the signatures / comments from their petition, then sign this one:

Petition to Real (http://www.petitiononline.com/notreal/petition.html)

It already has almost as many signatures as Real's petition... :D

liketom

Aug 17, 2004, 06:22 PM

has any news websites picked up on the "Don't break my Petition, iTMS Users!" cos i can't wait to read what they have to say lol "Mac user's unite, to flush real out of existence" hehe

GFLPraxis

Aug 17, 2004, 06:39 PM

i've never met a windows zealot.

http://groups.msn.com/billgatesfanclub

There you go. One of them called Bill Gates god...

stoid

Aug 17, 2004, 06:41 PM

http://groups.msn.com/billgatesfanclub

There you go. One of them called Bill Gates god...

He is the god of unethical business practices and corporate warfare. ;)

destroyboredom

Aug 17, 2004, 06:41 PM

Tell 'em what you really think.

admin@freedomofmusicchoice.org

shamino

Aug 17, 2004, 06:42 PM

There are millions of people out there campaigning for Apple to be squashed.
And for some reason, they all seem to hang out on comp.sys.mac.advocacy :)

corywoolf

Aug 17, 2004, 06:51 PM

You can still put an email and name down, so give an email address like dierealnetworks@realsux.com, then as a name put down REALREALLYSUX

Although it is highly immature, it will still piss off real networks. On second thought, if they used this in a courtroom they wouldn't have time to go over all the names & emails, so hmmmmmm, it was a funny thought though?! :D

________________________________________________________________
2* 12" pb's, imac old school dv, first superdrive imac, 40 gb ipod 3rd gen, nikon coolpix, and much more periphrials, if i could spell ;) .

311, Pink Floyd, and the dead rule, pink floyd is the best band ever though. :cool:

nagromme

Aug 17, 2004, 06:54 PM

AliensAreFuzzy

Aug 17, 2004, 07:03 PM

GFLPraxis

Aug 17, 2004, 07:09 PM

I was looking around Real's site and found something interesting. Not only did Real steal Apple's DRM but they also stole part of the iTunes logo. I know some of you will say "Well it's just a musical note". Well, while that's true, I find it odd that they would choose just that style and the effects applied to it.

Wow. Very ironic. Email that to Apple, immediately- they can add it as one more list of infringements in the court :) Maybe they'll even give you a reward ;)

AliensAreFuzzy

Aug 17, 2004, 07:10 PM

Wow. Very ironic. Email that to Apple, immediately- they can add it as one more list of infringements in the court :) Maybe they'll even give you a reward ;)

Yeah, one of those G5 Powerbooks when they come out

GFLPraxis

Aug 17, 2004, 07:11 PM

Yeah, one of those G5 Powerbooks when they come out

...next tuesday! :D

what, someone had to say it...

jwhitnah

Aug 17, 2004, 07:15 PM

AliensAreFuzzy

Aug 17, 2004, 07:20 PM

...next tuesday! :D

what, someone had to say it...

Along with iTunes in Canada, Australia, and The Netherlands. ;)

GFLPraxis

Aug 17, 2004, 07:28 PM

And you forgot eMac G5's :rolleyes:

Yvan256

Aug 17, 2004, 07:28 PM

Along with iTunes in Canada, Australia, and The Netherlands. ;)

Woo-hoo! At last, iTMS Canada eh?

Oh, you were joking? :-(

Back to flamming Real on their petition, I guess.

P.S.: if you think only Apple users hate Real, you're wrong. *Everybody* hates them (I can't count the number of Windows systems I've re-installed because of their damn crappy software)

AliensAreFuzzy

Aug 17, 2004, 07:34 PM

Woo-hoo! At last, iTMS Canada eh?

Oh, you were joking? :-(

Back to flamming Real on their petition, I guess.

P.S.: if you think only Apple users hate Real, you're wrong. *Everybody* hates them (I can't count the number of Windows systems I've re-installed because of their damn crappy software)

Yes, unfortunately I was joking.
I hate them too. (7 systems) Real player is a virus.

el-boliviano

Aug 17, 2004, 07:35 PM

I was going to wait until I felt I deserved one - but I feel obligated to go and do my part to support Apple - sign me up for a 40GB iPod and I'll buy as many iTunes as I can!! If we don't support the technology we enjoy, then we shouldn't expect it to always be there.

GFLPraxis

Aug 17, 2004, 07:37 PM

Woo-hoo! At last, iTMS Canada eh?

Oh, you were joking? :-(

Back to flamming Real on their petition, I guess.

P.S.: if you think only Apple users hate Real, you're wrong. *Everybody* hates them (I can't count the number of Windows systems I've re-installed because of their damn crappy software)

Check out Slashdot. Linux users hate them more than Mac users.
As one Slashdot user said, "Microsoft software and Real software both have one thing in common- they both require a re-format to get rid of them."

Yvan256

Aug 17, 2004, 07:42 PM

My crystal ball tells me how this will end:

1. Some hacker figures out how to use Harmony to break DRM.

2. The RIAA kills Harmony and Apple comes out squeaky clean :)

I see a more darker future, and it scares me.

1. Some hacker figures out how to use Harmony to break DRM.

2. The RIAA, seeing as DRM is too weak and "can't protect their artists", kills digital downloads and Apple has to close all four iTMS.

Granted we'd still have iTunes/iPod (which is the only thing I have now anyway being Canadian), but it'd be a step backward. And no way in hell would the RIAA ever agree to such a thing as "secure digital downloads" in the future.

analogkid

Aug 17, 2004, 07:42 PM

andiwm2003

Aug 17, 2004, 07:43 PM

Are you an iPod user tempted by this? I haven't seen many of those posting :D

Real cracked the iPod but as near as I can tell they have not cracked the iTunes jukebox. So if you buy Real songs, you can't use iTunes. Not just the Store--you can't use Real-format music in iTunes at all. So say goodbye to iPod features like Smart Playlists, eatings management from your PC screen, editing and saving On-the-Go playlists, two-way play stats tracking/synching, per-song equalizer presets, etc.

Losing those features is not worth saving a few bucks during a short-term sale.

Now, you can still connect your iPod to iTunes... but then you'll get your iTunes music and NOT the Real music you bought. It's either-or. So much for having one library of all your music!

Worst of all, with Real, you lose your ability to use your existing music in any of the following formats:

* iTunes downloads (the vast majority of legal downloads)
* Audiobooks (Audible)
* Apple Lossless
* And what about CDs ripped to AAC from iTunes? Will Real's jukebox play those? (I know their AAC rips aren't standard like the files iTunes makes--they are wrapped in their own Real format.)

iPod owners will NOT go for this.

Meanwhile Apple will enjoy the free iPod publicity :)

you are absolutely right. people buying stuff from apple are usually willing to shell out a few more bucks for convenience, design, stuff that works. saving 10 dollar won't cut it. but a little competition (or at least the threat of) will help apple to stay on top of things.

and with real failing miserably we will get real out of the way (who likes this dreadful realplayer that screws up your PC, reassigns file formats).

It also will deter others and show that you need good products to enter that market.

my 2 cents, andi :D :D