That's because may be Apple doesn't want to pay Microsoft like other mp3 player makers that support WMA don't want to pay extra money to support AAC.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac OS X on Intel? Convergance? iPod and iTunes.
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What benfits do you get from using another big name product i dont see the point either ibm seem fine to me the iPod is doing fine as well. iTunes both formats seems to be doing well in fact to well lol
But all in all seems to me Apple dose what it wants mucht the same as what M$ do as well take into acount they domanate 90 +% of the worlds computers all those users are forced to use things they dont want and hence why i now use Macs
but this is not a PC VS PPC THREAD THANK TAZO FOR THAT ONE LOL!!!
But all in all seems to me Apple dose what it wants mucht the same as what M$ do as well take into acount they domanate 90 +% of the worlds computers all those users are forced to use things they dont want and hence why i now use Macs
but this is not a PC VS PPC THREAD THANK TAZO FOR THAT ONE LOL!!!
Re: The Mac licensing question all over again
Ummm, isn't ACC actually MP4 just with Apple's own little name on it? I think there are some other tweaks in it but I thought the MP4 formats should play on any mp4 player. I am no expert in this area and would love to hear from some one who does know more about this. If I am right or somewhat close, then ACC won't "hobble" the iPod. If I'm way off base then I think Booga has a good point. I like to cma.
Ummm, isn't ACC actually MP4 just with Apple's own little name on it? I think there are some other tweaks in it but I thought the MP4 formats should play on any mp4 player. I am no expert in this area and would love to hear from some one who does know more about this. If I am right or somewhat close, then ACC won't "hobble" the iPod. If I'm way off base then I think Booga has a good point. I like to cma.
AAC is a Dolby format.
Apple's not doing some weird proprietary thing here folks - it's a standard audio format.
Apple's not doing some weird proprietary thing here folks - it's a standard audio format.
No that would be stupid.
What should be done in your example is for Napster, WalMart and others to license FairPlay from Apple and use AAC. Instead, they use WMA which is neither free, nor open, nor standard. (AAC is open and standard, Fairplay is tacked onto AAC). For the record: AAC is to MPEG-4 as MP3 is to MPEG-2 (i.e. AAC == mp4 but they chose AAC because "mpeg2-layer3". This created a confusion that is why there is no MPEG-3 and it was decided to avoid such confusion in the future).
This is not a case of BetaMax vs. VHS simply because the "VHS" in this case isn't open and the owner of it is a monopolist (in the legal and economic sense, but obviously not in the FUD, revisionist history sense). Honestly, if something like 80% of the purchased music is encoded on AAC/Fairplay in which a license fee was paid to a consortium of industry developers and experts (like Apple, Dolby, and others), why should Apple pay a licensing fee to Microsoft which is pushing their own format as "standard" in an attempt to co-opt everyone else and extract another monopoly position?
Also, I can't play WMA files on my mac (well I can, barely) because Microsoft's media player support is crap on the Mac, why should Windows users get preferential treatment (we are talking parity here, not preferential). Sure, I can handle other media players on iTunes for the Mac, but that's because Apple made money from me because I bought a Mac and Mac OS X (obviously both from them). In fact, if Apple didn't support them in iTunes, developers would balk. (Note, contrary to the 1500 some odd people on the MVP payroll, this example is not a monopoly in the legal or economic sense--this is free market at work. If Apple didn't support 3rd party players in iTunes for the Mac, developers would leave the platform hurting Apple's sales.)
Finally, look at how iTunes is structured. They went and ported everything down to using QuickTime for playback and OpenGL to render the GUI widgets. Supporting Windows Media isn't in the cards because it means building a dependency against Windows Media in addition to QuickTime. When QuickTime and iTunes on the Mac support WMA license-free, then maybe you'll see iTunes for Windows support it.
Until other players license FairPlay, it doesn't make sense for iTunes for Windows (a free software package) to support any other player either. After all, what's in it for Apple? They pay a licensing fee for the MP3 encoder and what do they get in return: no sales of music (these players either don't support anything other than MP3 or support the Microsoft proprietary WMA), no sales of iPods (obviously), and no revenue licensing fees through the MPEG-4 consortium and directly via FairPlay (because it's WMA).
Really, let's translate the two questions: ``the iTunes music store should work with MP3 players other than the iPod'' == ``You should make a piece of software that you don't make a penny on drive sales toward your competitors who'd rather user a proprietary, closed standard than one you help create.'' and ``Apple's iPod should work with other music download services'' == ``You should pay to license the a proprietary, closed standard that represents a small market share* deliberately weakening a competitive advantage (vertical integration, patents on synchronization) in your products.''
I hope as consumers, it is important that we try to be educated about what the issues really are--and educate others. Let's not let lies about "AAC is not standard" or "WMA is standard" continue. Because there is a company out there who pays 1500+ people who are not even employees of the company to continue those lies.
Obviously, my post is from Apple's perspective. Now if you argue that then Apple will lose because Microsoft will use their monopoly position and extract rents on the OS to muscle into a new market (i.e. bribe OEMs to include Windows Media or claim that the OS and Windows Media can't be separated, or deliberately break APIs in an update in order to weaken a competitor--all of which they've done and been convicted of doing illegally before), then I understand. But Apple can't do anything about this--they're a company, not the government and they're out to make money, not to produce iTunes for Windows as pro bono.
While Apple cannot do anything. Perhaps, as individuals, we can.
* AAC marketshare + WMA marketshare != 100%. There is a hefty amount of sales of MP3, believe it or not.
If I said IBM+Apple 6/7 years ago I would have been called idiot. I still hear people talk about IBM compatables.
Re: Re: The Mac licensing question all over again
Ever heard the term MPEG1-layer 3. Thats the common MP3.
MPEG1 is VCD
MPEG2 is DVD
I'm not aware of a MPEG3
MP4 however is a compressed video codec also known as Div-X, MPEG4.
This is how I understand it, also I believe Rower is correct when he comments that "AAC is a dolby format," it may even be the audio codec used on DVD's?
If I have it wrong could someone please correct me. However I'm still a fan of PCM audio on the 12" LaserDisc.
Ever heard the term MPEG1-layer 3. Thats the common MP3.
MPEG1 is VCD
MPEG2 is DVD
I'm not aware of a MPEG3
MP4 however is a compressed video codec also known as Div-X, MPEG4.
This is how I understand it, also I believe Rower is correct when he comments that "AAC is a dolby format," it may even be the audio codec used on DVD's?
If I have it wrong could someone please correct me. However I'm still a fan of PCM audio on the 12" LaserDisc.
We live in dangerous times
No. No. No. If the iPod, the most popular Mp3 player on the market accepts WMA then why would any of the music stores use something better like say ACC w/ Fair Play? They won't, WMA will become the de facto standard and now we're all beholden to Billy and Monkey boy again. Right now Apple has the carrot and stick for acceptance of the Mp3 player market and the creation of a new standard. Use ACC you get the support of the "most popular Mp3 player" and sync it to "the best Windows App ever," don't and people save for iPods and use iTMS.
But, Apple has to make sure that ACC w/ Fair Play is something other companies who make Mp3 players can use. iTunes should become open to other players which use ACC. Most people bought the iPod on the idea that it could use Mp3/ACC/Audible/WAV, etc. and not because of WMA.
Apple must look beyond the simple hardware question and look into the realization that if WMA becomes the de facto, like Word or IE, then we all end up in the same stagnant places.
Originally posted by sethypoo
Frankly, I hate the WMA format. It just takes too much space and has iffy sound quality. I am very impressed with Apple's AAC format. However, it would be smart of Apple to make the next generation of the iPod compatable with WMA. Think of it, the iPod could then tap into iTunes, Napster, Wal*Mart music store, and so on and so forth. It would get Apple's name even more out there. Apple could, say, bundle the iTunes software with each iPod and include a gift certificate for $10 to lure people in that direction.
Genius, I should work for Apple, lol.
No. No. No. If the iPod, the most popular Mp3 player on the market accepts WMA then why would any of the music stores use something better like say ACC w/ Fair Play? They won't, WMA will become the de facto standard and now we're all beholden to Billy and Monkey boy again. Right now Apple has the carrot and stick for acceptance of the Mp3 player market and the creation of a new standard. Use ACC you get the support of the "most popular Mp3 player" and sync it to "the best Windows App ever," don't and people save for iPods and use iTMS.
But, Apple has to make sure that ACC w/ Fair Play is something other companies who make Mp3 players can use. iTunes should become open to other players which use ACC. Most people bought the iPod on the idea that it could use Mp3/ACC/Audible/WAV, etc. and not because of WMA.
Apple must look beyond the simple hardware question and look into the realization that if WMA becomes the de facto, like Word or IE, then we all end up in the same stagnant places.
Sorry to be picky, but... MP3 is not related to MPEG2! The format derived its name from it being part of the MPEG1 specification ie, "MPEG1 layer 3" aka MP3.
TTFN...
Cool; I hadn't noticed that yet...
Wow; you pointed to something I hadn't seen yet. As a matter of fact, I have looked in that place once, but totally overlooked that icon-file. Pretty cool, if you ask me.
I tried to load a WMA-file into iTunes, but it wouldn't accept it. Anyone knows when the real support is coming? (And not just support for the icon...
Wow; you pointed to something I hadn't seen yet. As a matter of fact, I have looked in that place once, but totally overlooked that icon-file. Pretty cool, if you ask me.
I tried to load a WMA-file into iTunes, but it wouldn't accept it. Anyone knows when the real support is coming? (And not just support for the icon...
I hope Steve isn't letting greed cloud his thinking
The whole idea of iTMS was to sell more ipods. What could be better? Have other music stores sell music that is compatible with the ipod as well. License Fairplay to these other music stores. But don't license it to hardware mfrs. But I think Steve is letting a few million sales in the iTMS cloud the big picture. He may risk losing millions of sales from iPods by concentrating on sales in iTMS.
And then, once again, Apple will have this one little corner of the market for themselves.
The whole idea of iTMS was to sell more ipods. What could be better? Have other music stores sell music that is compatible with the ipod as well. License Fairplay to these other music stores. But don't license it to hardware mfrs. But I think Steve is letting a few million sales in the iTMS cloud the big picture. He may risk losing millions of sales from iPods by concentrating on sales in iTMS.
And then, once again, Apple will have this one little corner of the market for themselves.
Re: Cool; I hadn't noticed that yet...
Maybe they are waiting on Microsoft? There is suppose to be a WMP update for X "someday". Perhaps it's CODEC's are what Apple is waiting for?
Originally posted by Bengt77
Wow; you pointed to something I hadn't seen yet. As a matter of fact, I have looked in that place once, but totally overlooked that icon-file. Pretty cool, if you ask me.
I tried to load a WMA-file into iTunes, but it wouldn't accept it. Anyone knows when the real support is coming? (And not just support for the icon...
Maybe they are waiting on Microsoft? There is suppose to be a WMP update for X "someday". Perhaps it's CODEC's are what Apple is waiting for?
jayscheuerle
macrumors 68020
Blah, blah, blah...
Whatever Steve.
Does anybody actually take this hyperbole addict with less than a half-bag of road salt? I don't even think he believes himself anymore.
I'm sure there are idiots who just scanned the article and are all psyched to buy the iToast...
Whatever Steve.
Does anybody actually take this hyperbole addict with less than a half-bag of road salt? I don't even think he believes himself anymore.
I'm sure there are idiots who just scanned the article and are all psyched to buy the iToast...
by tychay
That will be the key and will also indicate that Apple has won.
Apple is in the drivers seat. Why should they cower or bend to anything right now.
Nearly everyone considers them the Gold Standard or at least the one they compare the next best thing to.
If the McDonald's deal goes thru, this will further solidify their market. (McDonalds supposedly to buy 1 billion songs ala Pepsi.)
The others should quickly start figuring out how they can play with Apple or they will be swept off the bow of the boat.
That will be the key and will also indicate that Apple has won.
Apple is in the drivers seat. Why should they cower or bend to anything right now.
Nearly everyone considers them the Gold Standard or at least the one they compare the next best thing to.
If the McDonald's deal goes thru, this will further solidify their market. (McDonalds supposedly to buy 1 billion songs ala Pepsi.)
The others should quickly start figuring out how they can play with Apple or they will be swept off the bow of the boat.
I agree with Steve WRT convergence
I often thought a Media center PC would be great, but when I got my DirecTV DVR Tivo in June I see why those Media PC's will never take off.
For $150 I got a box that I just plugged in and started using. 2 DSS tuners and direct recording of the MPEG-2 stream from the satelite to the hard drive. (Including Dolby Digital 5.1 on movies!)
edit: Oh - there is a $5 per month fee for the service - but it's worth it to me.
I often thought a Media center PC would be great, but when I got my DirecTV DVR Tivo in June I see why those Media PC's will never take off.
For $150 I got a box that I just plugged in and started using. 2 DSS tuners and direct recording of the MPEG-2 stream from the satelite to the hard drive. (Including Dolby Digital 5.1 on movies!)
edit: Oh - there is a $5 per month fee for the service - but it's worth it to me.
jayscheuerle
macrumors 68020
Re: I agree with Steve WRT convergence
Let's not even mention that your movies and music, all your "entertainment" is shot to hell if your system goes down. I've already run into that problem since all my CDs are converted to mp3s and my standalone CD player is broken...
Let's not even mention that your movies and music, all your "entertainment" is shot to hell if your system goes down. I've already run into that problem since all my CDs are converted to mp3s and my standalone CD player is broken...
Re: Re: I agree with Steve WRT convergence
To be fair, that's true of all my Pay-Per-View movies and other shows on the Tivo if the HD crashes or something too. But the Tivo OS is a lot simpler and only doing one thing -- being a Tivo!
What is kind of stupid is thinking consumers give a darn about whether or not something is an open standard. Competitors, who want to compete without investing in R&D, who don't want the cost of providing support, etc. care about open standards.
Consumers care about buying what they want, and they don't care who gives it to them and to hell with competitors who dont' give me what I want. In the end, in a capitalist society that's what creates monopolies. Supply and demand. If you are the only one supplying the overwhelming majority with what they want, you are a monopoloy. And just as we have the bankruptcy laws to appease losers because we are a caring society, we have monopoly laws to help keep the wealth distributed (except on the Mac platform where Apple gets it all).
WMA is a defacto standard, and is cheap enough. Microsoft does not compete with those who use it's media services. Apple does. That's Apple's choice and has little or nothing to do with Microsoft.
Steve doesn't endorse convergence at this time. Well what do you think a digital hub is? A convergence point. Steve does support convergence, but he doesn't want to invest in a living room PC right now because that's not Apple's business model. I don't think they want to take the R&D loss at this time. Neither do many others.
Microsoft was declared a monopoly and what has changed? Who is providing meaningful alternatives to IE, Windows, Office? The competitors who have led that charge have done what since getting what they want? ..........
The fact is they love the market Microsoft has created, and are more than happy to let Microsoft deal with the complexities of support, security, hardware conflicts, and trying to create and enforce defacto standards. What they want, is for the governement to force Microsoft to let them piggyback on Microsoft's OS and get rich without the work. That's my take.
Apple makes business decisions based on how it wants to make money. Those decisions tend to leave any market they are in, wide open, in a capitalist society, others will fill those gaps.
The iPod is great, but it's not for everyone. Some people actually don't like the design. Some don't need that much storage, so you think they're going to buy one just because Apple shareholders like money just like the rest of us. No, they're going to buy from someone who is selling them what "they" want. If that's someone building a product on Microsoft tools, what's it to you?
Some people really take this too serious. It's only personal for you. For Apple and Microsoft, and Sony, it's business.
Open source. If I buy a cake, I don't care where you got the flour. If you grew your own, or bought it from the farmer down the street. Because if the cake sucks, I'm not going to take the cake back to some farmer who gave you free flour. I'm bringing it back to you, and I'm going to go buy the cake that meets my needs from someone else. Open source is the dumbest buzzword B#@#@#t this industry has ever seen. It means absolutely nothing to the consumer. If you want to build off a free template, go right ahead. It's not going to affect the rules of supply and demand one iota.
jayscheuerle
macrumors 68020
The business model of iTMS and iPod in its current state is the game plan now. There is no need to change as the market stands now. With 70% revenue share in players and 80% share of downloads you dont go changing too much.
However there would also be no reason not to make the iPod compatible with competitors´stores in the future - if the market signs were pointing that out as the way to go. Apple have the money and the balls now to be as tough as necessary to make iTunes and iPod the best deal out there. Its just there is nothing out there right now to go the WMA route or whatever, so relax with the current programme and let the marketing terriers at Apple take all the stress pills.
However there would also be no reason not to make the iPod compatible with competitors´stores in the future - if the market signs were pointing that out as the way to go. Apple have the money and the balls now to be as tough as necessary to make iTunes and iPod the best deal out there. Its just there is nothing out there right now to go the WMA route or whatever, so relax with the current programme and let the marketing terriers at Apple take all the stress pills.
There have been countless articles about this, and its pretty certain that Apple keeps Marklar (an internal x86 build of OSX) up-to-date as a fall-back plan in case any radical changes need to be made to their hardware. Howeverm its obviously a safe bet that Apple and IBM will be using PPC for a nice long time, but the x86 software is pretty much always being developed alongside the PPC version.
Apple did consider switching to x86 chips (most likely AMD) before committing to IBM.