Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Jobs on 'open' iPod

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
70,338
41,949
RealNetworks' CEO made news last week when publicly asking for Apple to allow them to license Apple's Digital Rights Management format to use with their online music store. Such a license would allow Real to sell digital music downloads that would be compatible with the Apple iPod.

Cnet reports that Steve Jobs publicly dismissed such cooperation, saying "To be honest, it's just not worth it" at the annual shareholder meeting. Jobs notes that Real's music service has been "less than successful."
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2004/04/22/jobs-on-open-ipod/
I don't know that Apple should "open" the iPod for their own good, but it would be beneficiary to the consumer and possibly sell more Ipods as well as gain trust from the public by such a open-sourcey kind of move.
 
The only reason not to do this would be if the Music Store was making money, but various peeps from Apple have said time and again that the sole purpose of the music store is to drive iPod sales. Had they opened up to Real's service, then Real could also drive iPod sales. Not necessarily a bad thing. If Real's service fails down the road, then the customers could just switch to the iTunes Music Store and still use their iPod.

-- Ben
 
I agree that Real has been "less than successful," however, wouldn't this deal have seemed like a positive step in the right direction for AAC to overcome WMA in the legal download arena??
 
i think it's not a good move.
Maybe it's not "worth it" in the short run, but my impression is that it would have been a strategically smart move, because it would have extended the perception that Apple, unlike Microsoft, is open and that AAC/fairplay is the way to go. Hope they know better and this won't come back biting us in shaded areas
 
Don't panic said:
i think it's not a good move.
Maybe it's not "worth it" in the short run, but my impression is that it would have been a strategically smart move, because it would have extended the perception that Apple, unlike Microsoft, is open and that AAC/fairplay is the way to go. Hope they know better and this won't come back biting us in shaded areas
Click to expand...

The average music listener doesn't know or care about stuff like that. They buy the music device and then go to whatever store supports it. Real brings nothing to the table.
 
Don't panic said:
i think it's not a good move.
Maybe it's not "worth it" in the short run, but my impression is that it would have been a strategically smart move, because it would have extended the perception that Apple, unlike Microsoft, is open and that AAC/fairplay is the way to go. Hope they know better and this won't come back biting us in shaded areas
Click to expand...

It's not like they can just give Real some secret code and it will all magically happen. There are complications with having a media player contain music from two separate programs yet still be integrated in the same list. It's possible that the iPod simply isn't set up to handle this. And I am sure the changes are not trivial. So then the question really is, why should we add this to the iPod when we can be working on new products?
 
Realplayer sucks and it always has. I remember when I used Windows how it used to clutter the desktop with "join AOL" icons and take over all your file associations. Real was too big of an application and took too long to load.
 
It's actually easier to find gold than it is to find the free RealOne Player link on their website. They want your credit card # :eek:
 
If Apple can run all other iTunes Music Store and iPod wanna be's about 6 feet under the ground I think it if fine that they keep everything so tight under their control. However, I see this being a lot like DOS and Windows eventually winning the general market in the early days of the mac. Lots of people back then thought that Macs are great computers and really respected them but still bought the other computer. Consumers do weird things. If the iTunes music store and iPod end up like the mac is today sweet but only serving a niche then we see a repeat. I almost think that Steve thinks this is a second chance to do what the Mac should have done in the first place (rule the world).
 
Don't panic said:
i think it's not a good move.
Maybe it's not "worth it" in the short run, but my impression is that it would have been a strategically smart move, because it would have extended the perception that Apple, unlike Microsoft, is open and that AAC/fairplay is the way to go. Hope they know better and this won't come back biting us in shaded areas
Click to expand...

it's not something that's going to get any attention, the only people that would care would be people who have a particular reason to us another service as opposed to iTunes... and frankly, how many reasons are there? Apple's made great strides in inclusiveness, getting a huge library of music, and will (hopefully!) be available internationally any time now. Their service has the famous "user friendliness" that Apple has always attracted people with. I shouldn't think more than a fraction of users would think less of Apple for this, and they're probably not going to be Apple fans to begin with.

The other reason is a bit more complicated... sony will soon be starting their own music store, which will presumably be non-iPod. Sony could pretty easily yank it's songs from iTMS, if they were competing for the same userbase. As long as Apple stays proprietary on this, their music stores never compete-- so Sony Music doesn't have a direct reason to pull out of iTMS. But if they went head-to-head, sony would be licensing it's assets to a competitor, not a good thing. Obviously Sony already competes with Apple, but purely on the electronics front-- And sony electronics and sony music are separate.

paul
 
Macrumors said:
RealNetworks' CEO made news last week when publicly asking for Apple to allow them to license Apple's Digital Rights Management format to use with their online music store. Such a license would allow Real to sell digital music downloads that would be compatible with the Apple iPod.

Cnet reports that Steve Jobs publicly dismissed such cooperation, saying "To be honest, it's just not worth it" at the annual shareholder meeting. Jobs notes that Real's music service has been "less than successful."
Click to expand...

Jobs is full of it. Apple claim to want fair access to platforms (like XP) and then deny it when it's in their interest. Let's just admit that Apple are no better than anyone else in this area.

Frankly it worries me. Apple are small and if they keep people like Real and Sony out they'll either club together and beat him or the biggest, fastest company will win. Either way it won't be Apple.
 
jackieonasses said:
even though he has made mistakes before (steve) he has to know what he is talking about. plus (as said before) real is way to slow/big
Click to expand...
The article does point out that this could be 1985 all over again. History repeating itself. I don't see the harm in opening the standard to everyone, not just Real. As mentioned above.. it may drive more sales of iPod. I think they should push for the defacto standard and have people hop on their DRM standard.
 
hayesk said:
The average music listener doesn't know or care about stuff like that. They buy the music device and then go to whatever store supports it. Real brings nothing to the table.
Click to expand...
Maybe.

But having more suppliers/supports of ACC can't be bad.

Not sure that I understand his reasoning.

Granted most folks will purchase an iPod, then go to the ITMS as the provider. However, I would think that being able to use the iPod with more than one store that has ACC content would be good.

The iPod has a limited life span due to the battery issue. So an iPod purchased today will last say 1-3 years. At that point in time, folks will upgrade to a new iPod or something else. The key for Apple is to keep their customers returning for more. If having only one source (iTMS) for ACC content causes customers to look elsewhere, then Apple's current success in this arena will be short lived.

On the otherhand, the iTMS works very well. So maybe it will be the one. Then again, maybe not.

Sushi
 
Egad

Egad.. I hope we don't look back on this in a few years with regret..
I certainly hope that the iPod and the iTunes music store nothing but success.. but oh this just seems arrogant.. O.k. so maybe Real is not relevant... but.. but..
 
pgwalsh said:
The article does point out that this could be 1985 all over again. History repeating itself. I don't see the harm in opening the standard to everyone, not just Real. As mentioned above.. it may drive more sales of iPod. I think they should push for the defacto standard and have people hop on their DRM standard.
Click to expand...

Was Steve at the helm in 85 though?
 
Microsoft

I am looking forward to the Microsoft Music Store to compete directly with the iTunes Music Store. I would like to see Microsoft lose a turf battle. The media will basically be free advertisement for Apple.

Microsoft lost the browser wars on the Mac platform.
 
hayesk said:
The average music listener doesn't know or care about stuff like that. They buy the music device and then go to whatever store supports it. Real brings nothing to the table.
Click to expand...


This quote sums up my thoughts on the subject and I think it deserves a second post.
 
sushi said:
The iPod has a limited life span due to the battery issue. So an iPod purchased today will last say 1-3 years. At that point in time, folks will upgrade to a new iPod or something else. The key for Apple is to keep their customers returning for more. If having only one source (iTMS) for ACC content causes customers to look elsewhere, then Apple's current success in this arena will be short lived.

On the otherhand, the iTMS works very well. So maybe it will be the one. Then again, maybe not.

Sushi
Click to expand...

If the iPod's lifespan is only 1-3 years, there may not be much in long-term success for it. I didn't pay $500 for an iPod to have it die in such a short time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back