iTunes on the Android platform?

[Tilpots]

Not sure anyone has the answer yet, but what do you guys think?

Lots of good and bad for both Apple and Google. If Android's open source, seems Apple would be allowed, but will they offer such a great app to their new competition? They have iTunes for Windows...

 

[donga]

i like apple doing some regulation but they've handled the developer issues very badly in recent weeks.

just because a platform is open doesn't mean it's great. for example: pc/windows. plus there will be different phones for the android so you'll have to make sure it works on each model

 

[Cleverboy]

Hate to break it to you but...

There are three MAJOR features Android will NEVER have that the iPhone will ALWAYS have.
[--SNIP--]
#2. Complete iTunes integration, synchronization, and/or FairPlay support. Personally, I like iTunes. I have lots of iTunes media. I like to use my media on my Apple TV, computer, and mobile devices. I just downloaded the last two episodes on Venture Brothers on my Apple TV, and I'm throwing them on my iPhone tonight. I have tons of podcasts and audiobooks stored in my iTunes library. I regularly drop them into my mobile device and I'm off. Non-starter with Android. Android will never even have "Hulu" support on all devices irrespective of network. Just won't happen.
[--SNIP--]

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/6293124/
As in "N... E... V... E... R". It is the antithesis of Apple's vertical integration model to cooperate in ANY way that would force it to support other ecosystems they cannot secure some measure of control over. Apple would sooner make iTunes for Windows Mobile than create iTunes for Android. And, what would be the point? It's all about selling iPods.

~ CB

 

[Tilpots]

Hate to break it to you but...

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/6293124/
As in "N... E... V... E... R". It is the antithesis of Apple's vertical integration model to cooperate in ANY way that would force it to support other ecosystems they cannot secure some measure of control over. Apple would sooner make iTunes for Windows Mobile than create iTunes for Android. And, what would be the point? It's all about selling iPods.

~ CB

You make a good point, in this thread and the other, but...

If Apple's so committed to the iTunes Music store, why would they send customers to the Amazon Music store? When a customer wants to put music on their android phone, they're not going to be spending money on iTunes. They'll then find this music they purchased is available on any player they choose. Why continue to shop at iTunes when the music you get won't play on all the devices you own?

 

[Cleverboy]

You make a good point, in this thread and the other, but...

If Apple's so committed to the iTunes Music store, why would they send customers to the Amazon Music store? When a customer wants to put music on their android phone, they're not going to be spending money on iTunes. They'll then find this music they purchased is available on any player they choose. Why continue to shop at iTunes when the music you get won't play on all the devices you own?

You're asking the wrong question. Apple wants to sell music to iPod/iPhone/AppleTV/Mac/PC users. The ONLY caveat they've made, is in conceding that they must support "Windows" as the dominant desktop operating system for users to sync to. Apple is using media to sell HARDWARE. If you continue to confuse this point (and loads of people do), you'll never understand why they don't do what you'd like them to do.

NOW, that said... I won't seek to convince you of this, but trust me when I say that Apple would like nothing more than to be able to sell DRM-free media through iTunes. They tried to convince studios earlier on the DRM wouldn't work, that it is an irritant to consumers and ultimately, intrinsically flawed. Apple ended up giving in, yet providing the most flexible DRM ecosystem on the market then and now.

The studios are still trying to wind-back the clock so that Apple does not have so much power, by withholding that DRM-free right from Apple and giving it to Amazon and others. For any well-informed netizen to punish Apple for a recording industry that continues not to "get it", is ridiculous. It is the recording industry and NOT Apple who is leaving money on the table, and discouraging inter-connectivity. Even if hardware sales were NOT the issue... if iTunes Music Store were to be released on more devices than the iPhone, they would need an entirely DRM-free catalog of music. But hardware sales ARE the issue, so this will never happen. There is little business incentive. iTunes has all the bargaining power they need already.

Also, notice something else... Amazon on Android cannot download music over the cellular network (very much like iTunes WiFi store on iPhone OS). Why? --Because of the recording industry. Apple's continuing innovation is a fascinating dance to watch. They're exposing age-old problems in the system that have been long ignored due to over-complicated hardware/software in the mobile industry. Do you remember Microsoft's DRM "PlaysForSure" and how their version for mobile was called "PlayReady"? The industry has been trying so much CRAP, it must be truly aggravating for Apple to swoop in and use WiFi as a work-around for not forcing consumers to pay more for wireless music purchases. Amazon has followed suit, but I'm sure the legal dance being played would become that much MORE complicated if Apple were so stupid as to abandon its business model of pushing hardware sales, and believe... illogically... that they need to increase their liability and development costs by adding 3rd party platforms to their iTunes interoperability list.

As a note though, while there'll never be an iTunes Music Store on Android, the iTunes desktop application may find compatibility through 3rd party extensions. Software like the .NET-based "iTunes Agent", can help people sync non-DRM podcasts, iTunes Plus tracks and music ripped from CDs to 3rd party devices. Does it work with Android? Who knows.
http://ita.sourceforge.net/

~ CB

 

[gkarris]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5F136 Safari/525.20)

The Android platform will have Amazon instead if iTunes.

 

[Tilpots]

You're asking the wrong question. Apple wants to sell music to iPod/iPhone/AppleTV/Mac/PC users. The ONLY caveat they've made, is in conceding that they must support "Windows" as the dominant desktop operating system for users to sync to. Apple is using media to sell HARDWARE. If you continue to confuse this point (and loads of people do), you'll never understand why they don't do what you'd like them to do.

Again, you make good points. I, too, am of the belief that Apple wants to sell more hardware, it is after all their core business. And don't think that I'm wanting Apple to put iTunes on Android. I have no stake in it one way or the other, don't own an iPhone or plan on buying one of these Android devices. I do think they're decision on wether or not to provide software for the phones will be very telling of how they handle the iTunes store in regards to some of their other products.

My main issue here is actually an TV one. Why will they not add a DVR capability or a BluRay/DVD player? Lots of people around here say it's because they want to sell more content from the iTunes store. But I argue that by making better hardware, they sell more hardware, and the iTunes store will be the biggest beneficiary.

So, I'm very interested to see how they handle the Android platform with iTunes and wanted to see what others thought. You offer a great perspective.

NOW, that said... I won't seek to convince you of this, but trust me when I say that Apple would like nothing more than to be able to sell DRM-free media through iTunes. They tried to convince studios earlier on the DRM wouldn't work, that it is an irritant to consumers and ultimately, intrinsically flawed. Apple ended up giving in, yet providing the most flexible DRM ecosystem on the market then and now.

Agreed, SJ has said that he would provide DRM free music if he were allowed.

 

[wbeasley]

Isn't not having DRM free songs anti-competitive?

Agreed, SJ has said that he would provide DRM free music if he were allowed.

Come on all you litigation-mad Americans, can you tell me why Apple is letting the record companies provide DRM free music to their competitors without making some anti-competitive noise?

If you owned a shop and your supplier said "yes, I'll give you these items" but then gives better ones, at a cheaper price, to your competitor would you stand it? Why aren't Apple's lawyers doing something about this?

I'm happy to buy higher quality, DRM-free tracks on iTunes since I can play them on any PC/MP3 player I own (well AAC-friendly ones). I'm not happy to buy low qual, DRM tracks.

One last thing...

I recently paid to upgrade songs to DRM-free status. Not happy about having to pay (if I'd just waited, I could have bought them at the regular DRM price).

Maybe paying more made sense when iTunes Plus song cost more than regular tracks. Now they charge the same for both formats, why are we still paying to upgrade? (OK, so maybe a SMALL charge for downloading the data - I could live with/make sense of that).

 

[Cleverboy]

My main issue here is actually an TV one. Why will they not add a DVR capability or a BluRay/DVD player? Lots of people around here say it's because they want to sell more content from the iTunes store. But I argue that by making better hardware, they sell more hardware, and the iTunes store will be the biggest beneficiary.

What Ultimate NEW Apple TV Feature Would You Add (other than DVR)?
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/407036/
Linked, is the point at which I ignore my own thread title and get into a hypothetical argument about whether Apple should have a DVR for AppleTV. My own opinion now (as opposed to when that discussion took place), is that the cable card situation is far too screwed up and tenuous. I think "content" arguments regarding why AppleTV won't have a DVR, is more about disrupting Apple's partners. It's GREAT for Apple to have NBC back, but NBC accused Apple's customers of stealing its content. How much worse would an NBC-type company feel, if they believed that Apple was piggybacking off of their other broadcast agreements using a DVR?

Also, there are significant patent issues that had me advocating that Apple just go ahead and BUY TiVo. In the poll I introduced in that thread, most MacRumors respondents though Apple should buy El Gato, with Adobe running second place. I think, by simply providing software, that El Gato is in an excellent stand-alone spot. The significant risk of a vertically integrated company, is that having an end-to-end solution probably violates more patents than having a piece of a puzzle. Like... you could sell the leg of a chair... without violating the patent called "chair". Likewise, if Apple incorporated DVR capabilities into AppleTV, it would instantly intersect with an alarming number of highly lucrative patents.

My solution... Apple simply needs to open AppleTV up to 3rd party developers. Allow App Store for Apple TV. El Gato could leap in with a version of Eye TV and a USB hardware video encoder, and suddenly, Apple is in a whole new ballgame.

The only reason Apple wants to sell more content on iTunes, is for leverage and credibility. If Apple can disavow any coordination with 3rd parties doing a DVR, then they can arguably plead ignorance when TiVo bangs on the door. Selling more content on MORE hardware requires expanded customer support and custom in-house development. It's not a fount of untapped wealth. More than likely, its a recipe for disaster and a confused customer experience.

~ CB

 

[Tilpots]

What Ultimate NEW Apple TV Feature Would You Add (other than DVR)?
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/407036/
Linked, is the point at which I ignore my own thread title and get into a hypothetical argument about whether Apple should have a DVR for AppleTV. My own opinion now (as opposed to when that discussion took place), is that the cable card situation is far too screwed up and tenuous. I think "content" arguments regarding why AppleTV won't have a DVR, is more about disrupting Apple's partners. It's GREAT for Apple to have NBC back, but NBC accused Apple's customers of stealing its content. How much worse would an NBC-type company feel, if they believed that Apple was piggybacking off of their other broadcast agreements using a DVR?

My thinking is that if the TV gets a DVR, it wouldn't need to be compatible with cable or satellite. People could cancel their subscriptions because they'll get the major networks free OTA and can then buy any cable show they'll be missing on iTunes. Save on cable, save at the iTunes store. People would then be exposed to buying or renting movies straight through the TV. A simple and elegant solution for the a la carte programming option many people desire.

Also, there are significant patent issues that had me advocating that Apple just go ahead and BUY TiVo. In the poll I introduced in that thread, most MacRumors respondents though Apple should buy El Gato, with Adobe running second place. I think, by simply providing software, that El Gato is in an excellent stand-alone spot. The significant risk of a vertically integrated company, is that having an end-to-end solution probably violates more patents than having a piece of a puzzle. Like... you could sell the leg of a chair... without violating the patent called "chair". Likewise, if Apple incorporated DVR capabilities into AppleTV, it would instantly intersect with an alarming number of highly lucrative patents.

Apple is currently in a position to buy both Elgato and Tivo. No need for an Adobe aqusition to make the TV live up to it's potential. Owning these two companies would eliminate most patent issues and bring on board the top two products in their class. Very similar issue with bringing PA Semi on board. Why rely on a third party when you can have them in house making exaclty what you want?

I don't think the production houses could have a legitimate problem with Apple because the DVR technology and hardware is already out there and is becoming more and more popular. Cable and Satellite companies use it, Tivo is a household name, Windows Media Center has their PVR and so on...

My solution... Apple simply needs to open AppleTV up to 3rd party developers. Allow App Store for Apple TV. El Gato could leap in with a version of Eye TV and a USB hardware video encoder, and suddenly, Apple is in a whole new ballgame.

If they combine the mini and the TV, this becomes a non issue. The third parties are already developing Mac compatible software. From surfing the net to running apps, DVR to movie rentals, the new TV could do it all.


Back to why this all matters and is relevant with iTunes on Android, Apple's gonna have to show their hand as to which way they'll co-operate with the outside world.

 

[Cleverboy]

Back to why this all matters and is relevant with iTunes on Android, Apple's gonna have to show their hand as to which way they'll co-operate with the outside world.

I think its pretty clear they just "won't". They've tried to do so in the past, and the results have not been all that good. Currently, Motorola is the only other manufacturer Apple has worked with on FairPlay compatibility (Motorola ROKR E1, Motorola SLVR, Motorola RAZR V3i), and most people consider the partnership a failure and a stopgap measure to the iPhone.

Remember 4 years ago, in 2004, when Real announced its "Harmony" technology... that promised to unlock Apple DRM and allow Rhapsody DRM to work on iPods? Apple's response:
http://software.silicon.com/security/0,39024655,39122751,00.htm

Apple has issued a scathing response to RealNetworks' move to unlock Apple's proprietary technology and make it possible for people to listen to music in RealNetworks' digital file format on iPod devices.

In a terse statement, a "stunned" Apple accused RealNetworks of adopting "the tactics and ethics of a hacker" with the release of its Harmony software, which allows songs sold via its online store to be played on a variety of portable devices, including Apple's iPod and Microsoft-compatible rivals.

Apple threatened to block access to the iPod using Harmony the next time it updates the software used to run the device. The company last week unveiled the fourth generation of the trend-setting music player.

"It is highly likely that Real's Harmony technology will cease to work with current and future iPods," the company said in its statement.

In addition, Apple said that it is investigating the implications of Real's software strategy under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and other laws. The DMCA broadly restricts the bypassing of copy-protection technologies used in DVDs and in some music CDs and software programs.

The result?

In August 2005, an SEC filing by RealNetworks disclosed that continued use of the Harmony technology put themselves at considerable risk because of the possibility of a lawsuit from Apple, which would be expensive to defend against, even if the court agreed that the technology is legal. Additionally, the possibility that "Apple will continue to modify its technology to 'break' the interoperability that Harmony provides to consumers" would mean that "Harmony may no longer work with Apple's products, which could harm our business and reputation, or we may be forced to incur additional development costs to refine Harmony to make it interoperate again."

Apple's contracts with music vendors are tightly connected to the fact that the devices are ONLY Apple devices. For instance, you can have UNLIMITED iPods with the same music, movies, and tv shows on them, but only 3 Apple TVs and 5 computers running iTunes. With the exception of iTunes Plus, the moment Apple fails to guarantee this, they run into the threat of legal action from the studios.

I remember a certain amount of hubub regarding DVD Jon and "DoubleTwist ventures", with a technology that promised to allow 3rd party manufacturers to play iTunes music on their devices (by reverse engineering FairPlay). Talk about this has pretty much evaporated, with a "fast strip" technique for "liberating iTunes music into a DRM-free format, being the only lackluster thing remaining from the original promise.

Through anti-trust lawsuits and noises about how they'd use the DMCA to sue folks that started talking smack about providing FairPlay compatibility... I think Apple's fairly adamant on the whole "no" thing.

~ CB

 

[Tilpots]

Cleverboy,

Thank you for taking the time to provide your thoughtful insight. Your arguments are well thought out and backed up with factual information. Don't always get that 'round here.

I wonder how long Apple can stay self-sustaining. They've made it this far, and have been succesful. Here's to the future...

 

[Cleverboy]

Cleverboy,

Thank you for taking the time to provide your thoughtful insight. Your arguments are well thought out and backed up with factual information. Don't always get that 'round here.

I wonder how long Apple can stay self-sustaining. They've made it this far, and have been succesful. Here's to the future...

Thanks. You too. I guess we'll have to wait to see if Steve Jobs can follow-through this time and make Apple live up to its potential, or if Apple will again be robbed of Jobs, and we'll experience a repeat of history... Microsoft playing IBM and Google playing Microsoft.

Google vs. iPhone: Is Steve Jobs Reliving Past Mistakes?
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1843813,00.html?imw=Y

Cheers.
~ CB

 

[Tilpots]

Thanks. You too. I guess we'll have to wait to see if Steve Jobs can follow-through this time and make Apple live up to its potential, or if Apple will again be robbed of Jobs, and we'll experience a repeat of history... Microsoft playing IBM and Google playing Microsoft.

Google vs. iPhone: Is Steve Jobs Reliving Past Mistakes?
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1843813,00.html?imw=Y

Cheers.
~ CB

just saw this article on CNET...
Underestimating Google can be disastrous

At this point, I don't know if Android will lead the way in the cell phone industry and I have no idea if Google will supplant Apple and the rest or face annihilation. But if I had to put money on the most likely outcome, I wouldn't bet against Google. The company has been right too many times to bet against it.
Apple, RIM, Microsoft, and the rest need to wake up and realize that the G1's success isn't indicative of the future success of Google in the cell phone industry. Android is.