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

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
57,447
20,281
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."
 

howtoplaydead

macrumors member
Jan 31, 2004
63
0
NW FL
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.
 

bcsmith

macrumors member
Jan 6, 2004
63
0
Oaktown, CA
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
 

JohnGillilan

macrumors regular
Oct 12, 2003
161
0
Los Angeles
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??
 

Don't panic

macrumors 603
Jan 30, 2004
5,541
697
having a drink at Milliways
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
 

hayesk

macrumors 65816
May 20, 2003
1,456
96
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

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.
 

DGFan

macrumors 6502a
Mar 28, 2003
531
0
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

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?
 

rfenik

macrumors regular
Oct 28, 2003
110
0
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.
 

Frisco

macrumors 68020
Sep 24, 2002
2,475
69
Utopia
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:
 

swissmann

macrumors 6502a
Sep 17, 2003
790
43
The Utah Alps
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).
 

rainman::|:|

macrumors 603
Feb 2, 2002
5,438
2
iowa
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

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
 

Penman

macrumors regular
Jan 27, 2004
158
0
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."

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.
 

pgwalsh

macrumors 68000
Jun 21, 2002
1,639
218
New Zealand
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
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.
 

sushi

Moderator emeritus
Jul 19, 2002
15,639
3
キャンプスワ&#
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.
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
 

kansast

macrumors member
Jul 18, 2002
68
0
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..
 

CrackedButter

macrumors 68040
Jan 15, 2003
3,221
0
51st State of America
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.

Was Steve at the helm in 85 though?
 

BornAgainMac

macrumors 604
Feb 4, 2004
7,053
4,726
Florida Resident
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.
 

barnett25

macrumors member
Jan 7, 2004
49
0
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.


This quote sums up my thoughts on the subject and I think it deserves a second post.
 

jocknerd

macrumors regular
Apr 23, 2002
154
0
Virginia
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

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.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.