Apple Disabling RealNetworks Harmony Technology

[iPost]

No. No. No. Apple allows almost everything but WMA and WMA DRM. Should they add FLAC? Yes.
Should they add OGG? Okay, I couldn't care less about Ogg, but what the hell.
Should they allow Real to ride their coat-tails and use bully tactics to get onto a platform they once scored? No, further hell no!
...
Apple isn't going to be the one-true-label because it will always be in competition with other music stores, but I think it can set a standard that works well for both labels—or what becomes of them—and consumers. No one else has given the consumer as much as Apple has.

I don't like Real either, but my concerns go beyond them...

With regard to PROTECTED content, the Apple iPod does NOT play almost everything. The only protected content the iPod plays is Apple's Fairplay.

If the iPod is to be the standard music playback device of the future (which would provide Apple with LOTS of cash), then it needs to be able to play music that can be purchased from a variety of sources.

I'm not a fan of WMA either and I'm not saying that Apple should be forced to support that. But, when a company figures out a way to get protected content to play on the iPod, they shouldn't be intentionally stomped out like what Apple did.

It's very unfortunate that the company involved here is Real because they don't really have much good will with consumers, so nobody is really sticking up for them. But what if the company was some independent music organization like Aimee Mann's United Musicians (http://www.unitedmusicians.com). Shouldn't they be allowed to sell protected music from their site that would play on an iPod -- and not have to get into contract negotiations with Apple to do so?

 

[adamberti]

Real can't be all that bad. Come on, NORAD uses their software to help the children of the world track Santa Claus. They must be on the 'nice' list.

http://www.noradsanta.org

 

[hulugu]

I don't like Real either, but my concerns go beyond them...

With regard to PROTECTED content, the Apple iPod does NOT play almost everything. The only protected content the iPod plays is Apple's Fairplay.

If the iPod is to be the standard music playback device of the future (which would provide Apple with LOTS of cash), then it needs to be able to play music that can be purchased from a variety of sources.

I'm not a fan of WMA either and I'm not saying that Apple should be forced to support that. But, when a company figures out a way to get protected content to play on the iPod, they shouldn't be intentionally stomped out like what Apple did.

It's very unfortunate that the company involved here is Real because they don't really have much good will with consumers, so nobody is really sticking up for them. But what if the company was some independent music organization like Aimee Mann's United Musicians (http://www.unitedmusicians.com). Shouldn't they be allowed to sell protected music from their site that would play on an iPod -- and not have to get into contract negotiations with Apple to do so?

You should read my earlier posts, because I want a single standard that is created by companies like Apple, by the labels, by musicians, and by consumers that works for everyone—or as much as possible. Apple has done far more than Real has for consumers and the future of digital music and Real's facade irritates me to no end.
Now, a group like United Musicians can deal directly with Apple as a label so the situation is different, but I agree this situation is untenable for the short term.
Apple has done a great job thus far and I believe only Apple has the inertia and the ability to shift music away from the labels and into artists' hands. Real won't do this even if they could.