Apple Refused to Build Copyright Filters for iPod

[Avatar74]

*rickety old codger voice*

Why, back in my day, people used to criticize and complain endlessly that the iPod/iTunes business model is proprietary, closed and locked down by DRM.

Ah, those were the days...

*plays "The Humpty Dance" on vintage iPhone while hobbling away with my walker*

 

[pilotError]

They said they wouldn't implement the DRM in the Zune. They didn't say anything about the OS or the Zune version of iTunes.

I would be more worried about the other half of the statement talking about AT&T filtering the content on their networks.

 

[milo]

"Fair use" is not a law. They don't have to allow you or make it easy for you to do. They just can't sue you for it.

Technically, fair use is part of US copyright law. You are allowed to make copies that fall under fair use (they can't not allow you, meaning they can't stop you on a legal basis). But you're right, they don't have to make it easy - they can block copying through technology.

Funny you say that - MS is absorbing the costs for higher priced content for unified pricing on the Zune.

Where did you hear that?

I see a lot of posters praising Apple, saying it was good of them to make this decision. And I agree, from an average user's point of view it is. Even if that user doesn't download his content from free source, be they legal or not. But that doesn't explain Apple's reasoning. Why wouldn't Apple grant NBC's wish?

Because it's impossible to implement. And because it would almost certainly not work right and would end up blocking legally purchased content, pissing off users. Could you imagine if Apple tried to somehow get ipods to only play legally purchased music? Impossible - any attempt would either be completely ineffective or end up blocking tons of legit content.

Fair use must be the most misunderstood word in copyright law.
It has to do with how many notes in a new composition may be the same as notes in a previously copyrighted song. It has nothing to do with copying your copy of an underlying work.

That is incorrect. It applies to both (although there's no such thing specifically as "how many notes"). Things like time shifting and format shifting are based on the principle of fair use.

MS has been making money on the Xbox for well over a year.

While they are finally making money on each box, they're still way in the red from all the years of selling at a loss.

 

[diamond.g]

I am kinda confused. Since when does Apple video not have DRM? Where can you buy video with no DRM that will play on the iPod OOTB?

I was always under the impression that DeCSS wasn't legal. DCMA doesn't allow for us to break the protections schemes (arcoss, bad sectors, etc) that the movie studios use since CSS was broken. This is why blu-ray has bd+ as a mean for preventing the movies from being format shifted. I would think that if format shifting (because DVD is already digital) was legal then all those protection schemes wouldn't be.

 

[milo]

I am kinda confused. Since when does Apple video not have DRM? Where can you buy video with no DRM that will play on the iPod OOTB?

This has already been explained in the thread. NBC wants them to block pirated video from playing on iPod. Which is pretty much impossible.

 

[diamond.g]

This has already been explained in the thread. NBC wants them to block pirated video from playing on iPod. Which is pretty much impossible.

I never said it was possible, I was just questioning some comments that made it seem like Apples video was sans DRM.

I think product placement and ad overlays will become the norm. Those things will basically be impossible to get rid of.

As far as DVD's are concerned, they could just start selling ad space there too (again with product placement). I am actually surprised they haven't.

 

[Sandfleaz]

What's a Zune?

 

[sanford]

Technically, fair use is part of US copyright law. You are allowed to make copies that fall under fair use (they can't not allow you, meaning they can't stop you on a legal basis). But you're right, they don't have to make it easy - they can block copying through technology.

milo, remember the precedent set... I can't remember when; it was a long time ago... That it was legal to make back-up copies of software you owned for archival purposes? Up till then a lot of disk media -- it may have mostly still been floppies -- was copy-protected: You had to use some sector-copy utility to get around it, just back up a floppy, and even then it sometimes didn't work (and floppies you really needed to back up!). So there was that decision, and then someone sued some software publisher for a mechanism so they could make legal back-ups, as per the precedent decision, of their copy-protected install disks, and the publishers settled, I think. And then suddenly no more copy-protected software disks (or discs).

I think had copy-protected music CDs actually survived in the market long enough to be a nuisance, we would have gotten a hard precedent that ripping for your iPod is fair use, and then someone would have sued a record label for a way to that since precedent gave them the right do so, and then copy-protected music CDs would have just vanished.

So, of course you're right, they can block copying with technology. But ultimately they will lose a suit based on hampering fair use by any means. I think the reason DVDs are still protected, and they are even working stiffer protection, is the overwhelming majority of people watch DVDs on their DVD players. I mean, people have adopted HD movies at an astounding rate -- turned out Blu-ray (BD) did better than HD DVD, but swap one for the other, it's still people really were buying HD TVs and HD media players to go with them. BD is displacing some DVD sales, already. No one saw this coming, expecting the ultimate outcome of the HD physical media format war not to matter for years, while DVD remained really the only game in town. But people are buying so many BDs when available over the DVD version, they're actually taking a substantial chunk out of the same title on DVD.

Forget copyright protection, BD drives in computers are obscure niche items, let alone any kind of software to rip them. So, while a lot of people will buy or rent digital download content, the overwhelmingly majority of people who buy something on physical media will forever use that physical media to watch that content. Very few people care to rip the 20 DVDs they own and 75 DVDs they own for their kids -- -- to a digital library. Ergo, the studios' home video distribution w/ copy-protection hampering fair use has largely gone unchallenged. Most people just don't care. Music, they cared. But CDs take a few minutes to rip and encode. DVDs, most Macs and PCs take real time, and even for people with very fast computers and hardware-based dedicated h.264 in varieties affordable to the consumer, best you can do is half of real time. That's typically almost an hour. It's just not a common thing, ripping DVDs for use on multiple devices; buying digital downloads at the outset is the regular thing. Whereas music, it's mixed, CDs and digital downloads.

 

[ryanyogan]

what??

I like this site, I do it usually has interesting news....

Having said that, I believe a majority of you are not educated in this area and you should be. First off Microsoft will not do this, nor have they ever said they will. More importantly Apple is the industry plague of DRM, content control, tpm lock down, etc... When you boot your Mac you cannot even get into the real EFI settings, what is that all about??

I own a Macbook and I like it a lot however I am a network engineer in a Microsoft camp and I wouldn't have it any other way. If Apple was in Microsoft's place we'd all be screwed, sure we would have pretty interfaces and cool looking computers at work; however we would pay one vendor for something we have no control over. I am not talking about simply music or videos, I am talking about 99% of what Apple puts out is crippled in multiple ways. I understand their position and they are a business first and foremost, and a business is there for one thing and that’s to make money not to make your life better or be 'cool'. But when people start slamming Microsoft and in particular about DRM it is all fine until you compare it to an Apple product.

Have a look at the System Preferences on OS X, there is nothing in there! You could memorize every setting in less than an hour if you wanted to. Simplicity is great and that’s very true; however your computer experience has been decided for you. There is not much else you can do unless you’re a UNIX geek and don't mind mucking around in the term. Some of you may do this (or purchase 3rd party software that is basically a GUI for commands and alters the kexts), but I am sure most of you have no idea what the terminal is, where it came from and how it can benefit you in the first place.

Apple is a great company but there is one thing they will never slack down on and that’s DRM in one shape or another. You may argue back at me that Apple is pushing for DRM free content (music only?). Have you noticed that to get to this content its one small link on their music store, have you noticed they never speak of it or push it hard? Even with the DRM free music, look how closed the model is. The iTunes store / iPod is such a locked down process if any other company I still cannot figure out how they are getting away with it. Maybe I am the miss-informed one, or I am in the wrong business.

Microsoft screwed people with Play For Sure... Partly however they only provided the software, the crypt for the music (easily strippable on purpose, but we can't use that for this argument) and the codec’s. It was the content distributers that screwed everyone harder. Okay so you purchased those songs and they could no longer be played on new devices *NEW* devices, they are still playable on the original device. What does that remind you of, oh that’s right the iPod. What happens if you decide you no longer like the iPod, what do you do with your music? What happens if your hard drive skips a beat and a few sectors are damaged, you can easily render all your music unplayable. Apple can de-authorize your music at the drop of a pin if they wanted to. If you switch computers you can't start playing those songs without authorizing them. Have more than 5 computers? Then your screwed too.

I like Apple and I like their products because they force competitors to wake up and start making more intuitive products. But don't for one second believe Apple is the good guy, they are just as bad if not worse than any other tech company.

 

[FunkyELF]

mythtv and myth2ipod

I used to legitimately get my NBC shows as well as Comedy Central and anything else I choose to from my own MythTV box. Once the show is recorded and hardware encoded to mpeg2, my machine automatically cuts commercials and transcodes it into an iPod format h.2xx. It then puts it in my webserver directory along with an xml file giving some info on it like the name, date etc.
myth2ipod also has a php script that takes all xml files in that directory and creates an rss podcast.
Basically... I'd leave my iPod plugged into any machine with iTunes on and have iTunes subscribe to my MythTV poscasts. I can go to sleep and in the morning I have all my late night shows like Colbert Report and Southpark on my iPod ready to go.

That is what I used to do until I had enough of iTunes and the stupid way they put the files on my iPod. Also, I got tired of having to use a 2nd machine that has iTunes on it to get the crap on there. Instead I gave up on video and run RockBox.

 

[kornyboy]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

How big of a gun do they need to shoot their foot on this one?

 

[hayesk]

Having said that, I believe a majority of you are not educated in this area and you should be.

Wow, such an arrogant statement coming from someone who can't support their own opinions. You need to show a little humility.

First off Microsoft will not do this, nor have they ever said they will.

Sure, but they also pay a fee to Universal, and shut down MSN Music - they've clearly shown their in favour of supporting corporate interest over their own customers.

More importantly Apple is the industry plague of DRM, content control, tpm lock down, etc... When you boot your Mac you cannot even get into the real EFI settings, what is that all about??

Sure you can. If you are knowledgeable enough about computing that you actually need to adjust those settings, then you know how to do it. 99%+ of customers never need to do this, so why would Apple clutter the screen with access to it?

I own a Macbook and I like it a lot however I am a network engineer in a Microsoft camp and I wouldn't have it any other way. If Apple was in Microsoft's place we'd all be screwed, sure we would have pretty interfaces and cool looking computers at work; however we would pay one vendor for something we have no control over.

Last time I checked you pay a one vendor, Microsoft, for software proprietary to them with minimal support for open standards.

I am not talking about simply music or videos, I am talking about 99% of what Apple puts out is crippled in multiple ways.

You have failed to provide a single example of this. Your point is invalid.

Have a look at the System Preferences on OS X, there is nothing in there!

Uhm... that's a good thing. Experts can get around them. Novices would be confused if there were thousands of panels and preferences. It seems you lack an understanding of how real people use computers.

You could memorize every setting in less than an hour if you wanted to.

That's a good thing.

Simplicity is great and that’s very true; however your computer experience has been decided for you. There is not much else you can do unless you’re a UNIX geek and don't mind mucking around in the term.

Generally, the people that want to do extra things typically have the knowledge to get a third party utility or use the Terminal.

Some of you may do this (or purchase 3rd party software that is basically a GUI for commands and alters the kexts), but I am sure most of you have no idea what the terminal is, where it came from and how it can benefit you in the first place.

Alters the kexts? That would be quite the software. And how is purchasing 3rd party software a bad thing? Isn't that the point of a computer. You buy it and then buy 3rd party software to enhance its capabilities. Makes sense to me. I don't think you have enough knowledge on MacOS X or its users given a wildly incorrect statement like that. And I'll bet there's more than myself who sees the fallacy of that statement - even those of us that supposedly "have no idea what a terminal is."

Apple is a great company but there is one thing they will never slack down on and that’s DRM in one shape or another. You may argue back at me that Apple is pushing for DRM free content (music only?). Have you noticed that to get to this content its one small link on their music store, have you noticed they never speak of it or push it hard?

Have you noticed it doesn't make for a good user experience to push technical details at the expense of a good buying experience. The information is there for those that know and care about it. What do you want? banner ads?

Even with the DRM free music, look how closed the model is. The iTunes store / iPod is such a locked down process if any other company I still cannot figure out how they are getting away with it. Maybe I am the miss-informed one, or I am in the wrong business.

You are misinformed. DRM free music is playable by any music player that supports the open AAC music format - it's as simple as that.

Microsoft screwed people with Play For Sure... Partly however they only provided the software, the crypt for the music (easily strippable on purpose, but we can't use that for this argument) and the codec’s. It was the content distributers that screwed everyone harder. Okay so you purchased those songs and they could no longer be played on new devices *NEW* devices, they are still playable on the original device. What does that remind you of, oh that’s right the iPod. What happens if you decide you no longer like the iPod, what do you do with your music?

Uhm... most of my music is DRM free - I would load it on another music player. Apple is pushing to get all of their music DRM free - complain to the distributors if you don't like it.

What happens if your hard drive skips a beat and a few sectors are damaged, you can easily render all your music unplayable. Apple can de-authorize your music at the drop of a pin if they wanted to.

Yes, just like MS did to their MSN Music customers - a great reason to push for DRM free music - not really a complaint against Apple though.

If you switch computers you can't start playing those songs without authorizing them. Have more than 5 computers? Then your screwed too.

That's the rules Apple negotiated with the record labels. Don't like it, buy DRM free music.

I like Apple and I like their products because they force competitors to wake up and start making more intuitive products. But don't for one second believe Apple is the good guy, they are just as bad if not worse than any other tech company.

You have failed to support your case by presenting invalid points. Not only that, you opened your argument with an arrogant, condescending statement and then embarrassed yourself by showing a lack of knowledge of not only the technical details of your argument, but also a lack of perspective on the effects of DRM, the common computer user, and the posters in this forum, which no doubt could use the Terminal or download 3rd party software (gasp, 3rd party software to expand the capabilities of a computer?!? Who would have thought?) just fine, thanks.

 

[diamond.g]

You are misinformed. DRM free music is playable by any music player that supports the open AAC music format - it's as simple as that.

I can't speak to the other stuff the person typed, but I think that wasn't the point of what the other person typed. If I may, I think that the iTunes/iPod synergy is a great one. But there are some things that can be seen as anti competitive. So lets say you have all your music in iTunes (as any mac user would) you can't get iTunes to sync that music to anything other than and iPod (iPhone, AppleTV) device. IIRC iTunes used to be able to sync with other devices (but that may have been before the iPod). The reverse is also true, without iTunes you can't play (or even put) music from (on) your iPod. I don't know it has always been that way.

That is probably what the OP meant by their text. If not, then just ignore what I typed.

 

[nxent]

msft whores....

 

[dejo]

I've gone back to DVDs because iTunes movies are locked down so tight. I purchased the Office season 2 a while back on a different itunes account. I'll be damned if I can get it to play on my current account.

But you can authorize your computer with multiple accounts. So, I don't understand your issue here. Maybe you could explain it more. Thanks.

 

[CartoonHeroII]

i will say i am a HUGE fan of hulu just for that reason (they are nbc by the way). on demand shows for free with short commercials

I'm a big fan of hulu.com as well. I don't mind the three 15-30 second commercials per show. But I hate being required to watch the shows on my computer. I want to watch TV shows on my TV! What a concept. I know, I'm crazy like that. Not a chance with an TV. And I tried to play them with my Wii (because they're flash), but that didn't work. I have a feeling it has more to do with Adobe than Nintendo or NBC, but that's another thread in itself.

 

[ClimbingTheLog]

How would you tell?

You watermark the content before it's broadcast. Detect that and require an authorized key or prevent playback. Pure DRM, another player could play it back unadultered. It's the only way to prevent p2p distribution, and requires the hardware manufacturers to cooperate. Good on 'ya, Apple.

Somebody's lying. Who's lips were moving first?

Both of them, count on it.

I don't believe MS will implement this so called filter. They're not THAT stupid.

MS is desperate to have a reason for people to buy a Zune instead of an iPod. If you're a helpless fan of an NBC show you might just do it. They hope other networks will follow.

 

[spencers]

Yay Apple!

 

[MacAerfen]

"Microsoft has no plans or commitments to implement content filtering features in the Zune family of devices as part of our content distribution deal with NBC," the software maker said in a statement."

Is it just me or does the wording of this bother others as well. It really is a great piece of PR magic since it makes MS look like they are trying to smell like roses but it does not actually say they are not doing it.

All he really has said is that as part of their content distribution deal there is nothing that says they are going to put filtering features in. It does not say they do not have other deals with NBC to create this kind of feature, just that its not part of the content distribution deal. Even NBC didn't say it was part of that deal just that Microsoft was testing it. I mean why put the part about the deal with NBC in if they really want to reassure their users. Why not just say "We have no plans or commitments to implement content filtering features in the Zune family of devices.". Why? Because now they have plausible deny ability which is huge for companies. When they finally release such filtering they can legitimately say when people question them based on the statement they made "We never said we were not ever going to put those restrictions in, it just wasn't something we made a deal with NBC to do at that time."

 

[Peruchito]

Excuse my narrow-mindedness, but I've never understood this argument. These TV shows (most of which from NBC aren't very good, anyway) are free to the public via television. While I realize that selling their shows via a medium such as iTunes or the Zune Store (god forbid) brings in extra revenue for them, why are they going to such lengths to "fight piracy"? I mean, how is it even really piracy when it's something that's offered to the public as free in the first place via their television? What's to stop me from hooking up my VCR and videotaping their shows? Would they consider that piracy?

I dunno... maybe I'm just missing the big picture... it's all so very odd to me.

TV shows on TV are not free technically. you pay for cable. as well, ads pay for the content too.

BUT, i 100% agree with you about the situation being just plain stupid

 

[sanford]

I like this site, I do it usually has interesting news....

Having said that, I believe a majority of you are not educated in this area and you should be.

You'll get enough abuse for your opinions, so I'm not even going to bother courteously knocking them down one after the other, as they are yours and your right to state. But "good guy" or "bad guy" is relative, subjective and irrelevant. If there's a bad guy here, rationally it is NBC. (For the record, I find the notion MS would lock Zune to Zune Store content riotous, myself.)

I made a point, somewhere in this thread, that because Jobs defends unto his death -- metaphorically speaking -- a fair price for reasonably copyright-managed product does not make him an altruist. He's just making big money creating good deals for his customers, because that's making him the big money. Doesn't make him a white hat in a black hat world. Just makes him wealthy and the head of a very profitable company with high customer satisfaction.

But the big point, the massive battleship of a point, is that all your criticisms of Macs are entirely subjective. I am a professional writer and serious amateur musician, not an IT professional or computer hobbyist. I want professionals in computer hardware and software design to decide for me the computing experience that affords me the most good uses with the least hassle. The fact I can memorize all the settings in System Preferences in little time, know exactly the thing I need and where it is, that's perfect for me. That's exactly why I use a Mac.

By all means, a computer hobbyist or IT professional who takes his work home, experiments in the off hours, should buy and use a computer and operating system that can be configured on a much finer grain. But, for me, learning enough of Logic to do what I want with music is about the most technical I wish to get with a Mac.

So, the only problem with your clear, detailed statement is that it applies to you and people somewhat like you. We don't all want the same thing. I use a MacBook Air to write -- sort of the Mac version of a typewriter, with extras. Talk about limited, from the computer features angle. But it does absolutely everything I need for my professional efforts, plus some light demand additional tasks as required. So I'm very happy with the Air. I would expect a film editor trying to edit feature films on it to hate it like nothing on earth.

p.s. I should address this: Apple doesn't push DRM-free content? I have my iTunes account set so it automatically shows any DRM-free (iTunes Plus) content, and only that content. Technically, I don't even know a DRM-protected version exists. That's not pushing DRM-free content? Giving me the option of completely hiding the DRM-protected content when DRM-free versions of the same content are available?

 

[diamond.g]

p.s. I should address this: Apple doesn't push DRM-free content? I have my iTunes account set so it automatically shows any DRM-free (iTunes Plus) content, and only that content. Technically, I don't even know a DRM-protected version exists. That's not pushing DRM-free content? Giving me the option of completely hiding the DRM-protected content when DRM-free versions of the same content are available?

Apple has DRM free video?? Isn't what this is all about video content?
once again i am sure my post will get overlooked..

 

[ryanyogan]

Wow, such an arrogant statement coming from someone who can't support their own opinions. You need to show a little humility.

Sure, but they also pay a fee to Universal, and shut down MSN Music - they've clearly shown their in favour of supporting corporate interest over their own customers.

-> Why beat a dead dog with a stick? The closed it down because it was worthless, they admitted that play for sure was a flop and killed it off.

Sure you can. If you are knowledgeable enough about computing that you actually need to adjust those settings, then you know how to do it. 99%+ of customers never need to do this, so why would Apple clutter the screen with access to it?

-> Clutter the screen? What are you talking about? How about the little option + [insert key] to access something on boot? It was intentionally locked out from Apple and not for you scenario of cluttering a screen.

Last time I checked you pay a one vendor, Microsoft, for software proprietary to them with minimal support for open standards.

-> I personally have 26 vendors for our software here, I pay $600 for the entire MSDN package from MS (including every os, all dev software, etc...) what business with an I.T. manager worht a salt directly pays MS?!?!

You have failed to provide a single example of this. Your point is invalid.

-> You answered my point

Uhm... that's a good thing. Experts can get around them. Novices would be confused if there were thousands of panels and preferences. It seems you lack an understanding of how real people use computers.

-> I am having a hard time figuring out how a novice would get confused by how they want there O.S. to look and feel beyond 1 or 2 choices. What O.S. has thousands of panels (MMC's?) and prefs available to the end user? I have about 13 'panels' open during the day and manage 4,000+ workstations, 30 virtual servers hosting 15 clients each and 15 dedicated servers. Just short of 1,000 I guess.

That's a good thing.

Generally, the people that want to do extra things typically have the knowledge to get a third party utility or use the Terminal.

-> ... hence why I just said that

Alters the kexts? That would be quite the software. And how is purchasing 3rd party software a bad thing? Isn't that the point of a computer. You buy it and then buy 3rd party software to enhance its capabilities. Makes sense to me. I don't think you have enough knowledge on MacOS X or its users given a wildly incorrect statement like that. And I'll bet there's more than myself who sees the fallacy of that statement - even those of us that supposedly "have no idea what a terminal is."

-> Yes because you should have to purchase 3rd party hacks to do the most basic of alterations to an O.S. Apple really loves 3rd party devs, to the point of taking there concepts and putting them out of business (just like M.S.)... They also really like rebranding open source projects and calling them there latest innovation... I'm willing to listen, name 10 things that they are toting pretty hard right now and tell me they were developed inhouse from the start, I really want to know. There pro series software is 90% acquired as well so leave that out.


Have you noticed it doesn't make for a good user experience to push technical details at the expense of a good buying experience. The information is there for those that know and care about it. What do you want? banner ads?

You are misinformed. DRM free music is playable by any music player that supports the open AAC music format - it's as simple as that.

-> Thanks I couldn't figure that out.

Uhm... most of my music is DRM free - I would load it on another music player. Apple is pushing to get all of their music DRM free - complain to the distributors if you don't like it.

Yes, just like MS did to their MSN Music customers - a great reason to push for DRM free music - not really a complaint against Apple though.

That's the rules Apple negotiated with the record labels. Don't like it, buy DRM free music.


You have failed to support your case by presenting invalid points. Not only that, you opened your argument with an arrogant, condescending statement and then embarrassed yourself by showing a lack of knowledge of not only the technical details of your argument, but also a lack of perspective on the effects of DRM, the common computer user, and the posters in this forum, which no doubt could use the Terminal or download 3rd party software (gasp, 3rd party software to expand the capabilities of a computer?!? Who would have thought?) just fine, thanks.

Not arrogant, it is just amazing how Apple can **** twice as hard on its customers and they come right back screaming how MS is worse. I simply was saying Apple is no better than M.S. You are a prime example, look how quickly you fought back and with hostility. Take a break calm down, you don't work for Apple and I'm pretty sure they don't cut you a monthly check for your posts. MSFT whore, what the hell is that? Look I use what puts food on my table and provides a job I could give two *****, both of the O.S.'s are **** and are chaulk full of problems. But, I can't create a better one so its what I use. You went very far out of your way to prove a big point... unfortunatly you cannot figure out what the point is.

 

[macerroneous]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

Yesterday, we learn NBC will charge zune owners for content. Today, we here NBC is giving it away to iPhone/touch!! WTF? Seems like 2 million more phone sales on this news alone. Steve must be very happy. BTW the lower quality from NBC should be streamable on 3g iPhone. AT&T will get killed on useage if data remains unlimited.

 

[burningrave101]

Yeah, but it'll only affect the two or three people that actually own a Zune, so no big whoop!

Microsoft controls are fairly large market share with the Zune now. When the 30GB first gen Zunes were selling for <$100 people starting buying them up right and left. I also decided myself to go with the 80GB 2nd gen Zune because it was cheaper and offered more than 80GB iPod Classic. I was most intrigued by it's larger glass display vs the smaller plastic one on the iPod Classic.