Dis-Harmony Petition

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by sockeatingdryer, Aug 17, 2004.

  1. sockeatingdryer macrumors regular

    sockeatingdryer

    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    Location:
    Athens, GA, USA
    #1
  2. quagmire macrumors 603

    quagmire

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
  3. sockeatingdryer thread starter macrumors regular

    sockeatingdryer

    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    Location:
    Athens, GA, USA
    #3
    I read it, but I think it was lacking a little.... also, it was more geared just towards the "Freedom" thing. I want HARMONY down!
     
  4. enclave macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    #4
    Stupidity

    Number one, Online petitions do NOTHING

    Number two Apple is doing EXACTLY the same thing Microsoft has done, creating a proprietary format and disallowing anyone else into there precious market share. If Apple had not been so arrogant they could have licensed the tech out instead of trying to keep it under wraps, if you support the stance of banning real's reverse engineering then you may as well go over to pc's and enjoy the same attitude from Microsoft, get off your high horse about your exclusive "club" and get over it...
     
  5. munkle macrumors 68030

    munkle

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Location:
    On a jet plane
    #5
    Apple has shown willingness to license their technology, as demonstrated with the HP deal. Saying Apple should be thankful for Reals' hacker attempts is to say that Apple should let other companies freeload. All Real is trying to do is to lock consumers into their own proprietary format, instead of Apple's.

    Saying that Apple is doing EXACTLy the same thing as Microsoft is a bit weak. Microsoft is a monopolist, and has been convicted of illegally abusing their monopoly positions. With the iPod and iTunes, Apple is a market leader, but not a monopolist — thus anyone who describes their licensing decisions as “antitrust” would be talking out of their ass. :D
     
  6. kettle macrumors 65816

    kettle

    Joined:
    May 12, 2002
    Location:
    England, Great Britain (Airstrip One)
    #6
    That's the badger! :)
     
  7. Mitthrawnuruodo Moderator emeritus

    Mitthrawnuruodo

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    Location:
    Bergen, Norway
    #7
    You're quite right, but you are forgetting one thing: You can get a good feeling from signing, even though you know that the chance it will actually acheive something is utterly small...

    That's is not true. Beside the HP deal munkle mentioned Apple also licensed its format to Motorola, which will use it in music playing smartphones. You cannot blame Apple for wanting a bit of control as to who gets a licence, can you? Real has never had any desent products, and I'm glad Apple turned down their initial threats...
     
  8. patrick0brien macrumors 68040

    patrick0brien

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Location:
    The West Loop
    #8
    -enclave

    Not even close. You need to do a little more research.

    This is a good start: http://daringfireball.net/2004/08/parlay
    Or maybe: http://www.apple-x.net/modules.php?...=article&sid=1054&mode=thread&order=1&thold=0

    The Macweb may be biased toward Macs, but since most Mac users us PC's as well (the inverse is not true), the articles tend to be better informed.
     
  9. enclave macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    #9

    BS,

    Apple want's to control the music downloading business, the fact they want money like every other company doesnt bother me it's the fact they refuse to allow anyone into there little club, open standards are good for the industry and I applaud Apple on there support for a lot of these standards but kicking up a fuss over Real reverse engineering there tech is just stupid.

    It's just DRM for christ sake.....

    "Saying that Apple is doing EXACTLy the same thing as Microsoft is a bit weak. Microsoft is a monopolist, and has been convicted of illegally abusing their monopoly positions. With the iPod and iTunes, Apple is a market leader, but not a monopolist — thus anyone who describes their licensing decisions as “antitrust” would be talking out of their ass"

    BS that's how Microsoft started as "a market leader" your blinded by the fact your a fanboy.

    And licensing there DRM for a damn phone is totally useless, Apple knows no one can put many songs onto a phone so it poses no threat to the precious Ipod.


    Here's an idea, let everyone create drm files and MORE ipods will be sold, it's a win win situation.... I don't want to upset anyone over this but seriously competition is GOOD



    btw I'm a PC user who so happens to use a mac for editing movies.
     
  10. wrldwzrd89 macrumors G5

    wrldwzrd89

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    Solon, OH
    #10
    First problem - there IS NO OPEN DRM STANDARD. Sad, but true - until this changes, all the issues surrounding DRM, including reverse-engineering it, will continue. Apple's FairPlay isn't any more open than the others - but that doesn't necessarily mean good news for Real; in fact, all Real is doing, IMO, is complicating matters further. I term this sort of competition "bad competition", and I want to see it go because it's bad for the industry as a whole - confused consumers will not help an industry profit.

    Secondly, Apple is NOT a monopoly, but that doesn't automatically make Apple better than Microsoft. To be quite honest, I'm not sure why Apple refuses to make FairPlay more widely available. If more devices were FairPlay-enabled, then the iTMS would sell more songs, and more buyers would be attracted to the iPod. The lost sales to third-party players that this measure would cause would be more than offset by the additional revenue generated with the iTMS.

    Finally, it's time to call the grammar police (emphasis mine):
     
  11. patrick0brien macrumors 68040

    patrick0brien

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Location:
    The West Loop
    #11
    -enclave

    Please open your mind a little, you're not listening very well. Your treading dangerously close to trolling.

    And thank you for illustrating my point. You have no idea who I am, or my skills. You've based your opinion of me on very tenuous information and zero fact.

    You are entitled to your opinion, but try to base it more accurately.

    Please do your research before yelling.
     
  12. enclave macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    #12
    I have an open mind, you seem to cuddle close to your mac and close your eyes. Troll indeed....

    Perhaps if you stepped outside your comfort zone regarding Apple you would see that they have faults, until then enjoy the darkness your blindess causes.
     
  13. DavidLeblond macrumors 68020

    DavidLeblond

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    #13
    So do any media players other than Real's play .rm files? How is that not proprietary?
     
  14. MrJohnson macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    #14

    There are other players that can play .rm files.

    Also, enclave is right. Period.
     
  15. patrick0brien macrumors 68040

    patrick0brien

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Location:
    The West Loop
    #15
    -enclave

    Research my profile.
     
  16. MrJohnson macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    #16
    He is kind of right, I can name several things that we x86 PC users have that you guys don't have. Even though macs are supposed to be better. It's only because In the PC market we have open compitition.
     
  17. Rower_CPU Moderator emeritus

    Rower_CPU

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #17
    Quick rules reminder folks...

    The Rules™

    Mind the attacks, please. Thanks :)
     
  18. munkle macrumors 68030

    munkle

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Location:
    On a jet plane
    #18
     
  19. munkle macrumors 68030

    munkle

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Location:
    On a jet plane
    #19
    There's no need to start caling names. And your logic is very flawed - there is a very large step from being a market leader to abusing your monopolistic position. Being one does not lead to the other.
     
  20. Thom_Edwards macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2003
    #20
    it's just like .doc

    there is really no difference between real "reverse engineering" the drm and apple making textedit so it can read .doc files from microsoft word. somebody looked at the contents of a word file and figured out a way to open that file in something other than word. think about it........
     
  21. wrldwzrd89 macrumors G5

    wrldwzrd89

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    Solon, OH
    #21
    You're right - I thought Apple didn't do the reverse-engineering themselves, but based their implementation on the work of the open-source office suite developers. In the end, though, who did the reverse-engineering makes no difference - the end result is the same. Therefore, I conclude that Steve-o is making a bigger deal of the Real/DRM issue than he should be.
     
  22. SiliconAddict macrumors 603

    SiliconAddict

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
  23. SiliconAddict macrumors 603

    SiliconAddict

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #23

    Absolute power corrupts.....its a historical FACT and Microsoft is about as corrupt as a hard drive that has been thrown into a 10,000* furnace.
     
  24. patrick0brien macrumors 68040

    patrick0brien

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Location:
    The West Loop
    #24
    -Thom_Edwards

    This is a very good point. Technically it is the same. Then it is up to the arrangements of Intellectual Property law - is the .doc format trademarked? Copyrighted? Patented? My guess is yes (in some form), then it is up to MS to enforce the IP on it.

    Apple is notorious for being very agressive with IP issues, and yes, Fairplay is Trademarked, and likely Copyrighted.

    But on further thing, just because a company or individual has complete rights to an IP, doesn't mean they will enforce it. Classic example: Crunch zones for automobiles. The it is patented by Mercedes Benz (DiamlerChrysler), but they have never enforced it - and rumor has it, never will.
     
  25. munkle macrumors 68030

    munkle

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Location:
    On a jet plane
    #25
    Interesting...but is .doc a format that Microsoft seeks to license? For example MP3 is a proprietary format and Apple must pay royalties to encode and decode MP3 files. Apple doesn't try to reverse engineer the MP3 format. Surely there is a difference between reading a format, which doesn't appear to be actively protected, and 'hacking' a format to forego licensing restrictions. But I agree it is a thin line.
     

Share This Page