Hmm...
Isn't it widely known that Apple shouldn't even be in the music business? (Apple vs. Apple).
Isn't it widely known that Apple shouldn't even be in the music business? (Apple vs. Apple).
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.
RealNetworks To Sell iPod-Compatible Songs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It really frustrates me when the press paints the iPod as being a "closed" system for listening to music. This fails to paint the full picture, as it is only the iTunes Music Store that sells music in a format that forces a proprietary or closed-process for listening to iTMS purchased music on an iPod.
MP3 is an "open" format, if you don't like the limitations of iTMS, you can simply buy or convert your CDs to MP3 and they'll play on your iPod and just about any other relevant digital music player.
So, when articles suggest the iPod locks you into a proprietary system, they are both incorrect, AND being very misleading. Only iTMS does this.
It seems like we'll be going through a dark stretch where everyone tries to make digital music proprietary and hard to move around. This might actually boost CD sales again, as savvy users get sick of the download war - assuming the effort to copy-protect CD's doesn't accellerate too fast. Great thing is that Apple users already have a great, working, end-to-end solution for listening to digital music. Hearing Apple and monopoly in the same sentence does have a bit of poetic justice.
MP3 is an "open" format, if you don't like the limitations of iTMS, you can simply buy or convert your CDs to MP3 and they'll play on your iPod and just about any other relevant digital music player.
So, when articles suggest the iPod locks you into a proprietary system, they are both incorrect, AND being very misleading. Only iTMS does this.
It seems like we'll be going through a dark stretch where everyone tries to make digital music proprietary and hard to move around. This might actually boost CD sales again, as savvy users get sick of the download war - assuming the effort to copy-protect CD's doesn't accellerate too fast. Great thing is that Apple users already have a great, working, end-to-end solution for listening to digital music. Hearing Apple and monopoly in the same sentence does have a bit of poetic justice.
Stella said:
I second, third and fourth this statement.
As much as I can't stand Real (I have friends who work there and they tell me the most insane stuff too) I applaud them for being stupid enough to do this. Ultimately, it will get the doors open to others - although Real could be well and dead before then (a just reward for producing some of the lousiest software out there today).
This is great.
As much as I like Apple and my iPod, I think this is great. In many ways this is just like buying a CD, compressing to AAC and playing it on the iPod.
I do not understand what the fuzz is about with people that think this is ilegal or that think that having a mayor developer want to do business with Apple is bad. Yeah, they will be competing for online music sales with iTMS, but there are a lot of people out there that may not consider an iPod, because it can only play music from the iTMS. Now they can buy one and play music from a popular source.
You guys complain about companies wanting to develop for Apple, and you complain if they don't. What do you want, Apple to be marginalized more that it has been?
I think that RealPlayer is a great service and as soon as I get my DSL back I will probably pat the monthly fee to download movies and to watch the different sorts of media that they give you access to. I've seen this on a PC, and wanted it to be on the Mac.
Lets be more open minded people, if Apple blocks everybody from playing nice with their products, then nobody will develop for us.
As much as I like Apple and my iPod, I think this is great. In many ways this is just like buying a CD, compressing to AAC and playing it on the iPod.
I do not understand what the fuzz is about with people that think this is ilegal or that think that having a mayor developer want to do business with Apple is bad. Yeah, they will be competing for online music sales with iTMS, but there are a lot of people out there that may not consider an iPod, because it can only play music from the iTMS. Now they can buy one and play music from a popular source.
You guys complain about companies wanting to develop for Apple, and you complain if they don't. What do you want, Apple to be marginalized more that it has been?
I think that RealPlayer is a great service and as soon as I get my DSL back I will probably pat the monthly fee to download movies and to watch the different sorts of media that they give you access to. I've seen this on a PC, and wanted it to be on the Mac.
Lets be more open minded people, if Apple blocks everybody from playing nice with their products, then nobody will develop for us.
Article on BBC regarding this
"http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3925897.stm"
Quote:
The program mimics Apple's copy protection software, so Real says it has not infringed Apple's intellectual property rights by developing it.
It says its engineers used publicly-available information in order to work out how to make files compatible with Apple's digital rights management (DRM) software, which is called FairPlay.
--
So, may it is the case Apple can't do anything about this - 'reverse engineering' from information in the public domain. You could certinaly get a good idea of Fairplay from Hymm.
Apple should let iTMS compete on its merits.. it has a great UI and makes it hassle free... easier than other stores.
"http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3925897.stm"
Quote:
The program mimics Apple's copy protection software, so Real says it has not infringed Apple's intellectual property rights by developing it.
It says its engineers used publicly-available information in order to work out how to make files compatible with Apple's digital rights management (DRM) software, which is called FairPlay.
--
So, may it is the case Apple can't do anything about this - 'reverse engineering' from information in the public domain. You could certinaly get a good idea of Fairplay from Hymm.
Apple should let iTMS compete on its merits.. it has a great UI and makes it hassle free... easier than other stores.
WSJ Today-
"We have excellent lawyers and they assure me that we are 100% within all of the legal precedents and the letter and spirit of all laws," Mr. Glaser says. He says he has spoken to executives at all of the major recording companies, and they approve of the company's effort to end the online music format battles.
"We have excellent lawyers and they assure me that we are 100% within all of the legal precedents and the letter and spirit of all laws," Mr. Glaser says. He says he has spoken to executives at all of the major recording companies, and they approve of the company's effort to end the online music format battles.
Bad Move By Real because
They will have a lawsuit filed by Apple against them. This will limit Real's ability to raise future capital as equity investors will see this pending litigation (that Apple will most likely win) as a huge uncertainty for Real financially. Real has just backed into a corner. They were in a check positon on the chess board and now it is checkmate . Real needs access to the capital markets because they only have $60 million of cash which is way too small for the competition in this market. Also, it limits their abitlit to sell the company with the an Apple lawsuit.
They will have a lawsuit filed by Apple against them. This will limit Real's ability to raise future capital as equity investors will see this pending litigation (that Apple will most likely win) as a huge uncertainty for Real financially. Real has just backed into a corner. They were in a check positon on the chess board and now it is checkmate . Real needs access to the capital markets because they only have $60 million of cash which is way too small for the competition in this market. Also, it limits their abitlit to sell the company with the an Apple lawsuit.
mhouse said:
for counter example see TCP/IP. Microsoft tried to dominate the internet with proprietry protocols and failed miserable. Compatibility can be achieved by open standards instead of a monopoly and maybe what Real is doing will make Fairplay become the defacto open standard.
Ahhhh nothing like the smell of litigation to get you going in the morning.
I want to know what the hell was going through the mind of the CEO of Real?!??! Other then DUHHHHHHH. Because for the love of god by the end of the day Apple's lawyers will be over this like a pack of lions on a impala. Apples lawyers are going to carve Real a new one after this. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. And Im talking Real AND Apple. Apple should have licensed fairplay this Spring. This is how desperate people are to tap the iPods potential and Apples hanging themselves.
I want to know what the hell was going through the mind of the CEO of Real?!??! Other then DUHHHHHHH. Because for the love of god by the end of the day Apple's lawyers will be over this like a pack of lions on a impala. Apples lawyers are going to carve Real a new one after this. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. And Im talking Real AND Apple. Apple should have licensed fairplay this Spring. This is how desperate people are to tap the iPods potential and Apples hanging themselves.
TWinbrook46636 said:
Reverse Engineering is not stealing. The code is not exactly the same.
Perhaps you are one of those that think Linus stole from Unix to create Linux or that AMD stole from Intel to create compatible chips. I know it's an emotional issue for mac diehards but common. Interestingly, Apple may well sue and then all our questions will be answered. Until that, i guess we'll all continue to be amateur lawyers (or armchair lawyers)
eskatonia said:
Please ref this? IP has been the defeacto protocol on Windows for years. NetBEUI a close second and its still a protocol I recommend for some users who don't need a routable protocol.
mhouse is 100% right. Standards don't mean jack **** if no one uses them. MS can win by default if the industry just adopts them and ignores the "standard"
jydesign said:
The reason the press says it's a closed system is supported by the solution you gaved for listening to ITMS purchased music. It's a techie solution. I'm a techie, i code for a living but i have my mom, my dad and a few brothers and sisters who could care less how a computer works or even about converting songs. You think they want to spend their time converting ITMS songs to MP3? Why you think ITMS is successfull in the first place when there are PTP networks with free songs available? All the people on the PTP networks are techies or people willing to invest time and effort. People who shop on ITMS don't want to convert their music. If they did, they'd go on a PTP netork which already has the music in MP3 format.
The press is right. ITMS is a closed system to the audience it was intended for.
P.S. Yes, i know techies might shop ITMS so as not to steal music and be sued but the majority of people who use ITMS are not techies and are not interested in becoming one or mimicking one.
narco said:
no KIDDING. Real, you just can't take a hint, can you? this party is for the cool kids, not the annoying rich kid that figured out where the party was an crashed it.
i can see steve sitting around reading news of this..."they did F~(%!#@ WHAT??!?"
Apple's legal team is salivating right now...
Here's why...
Sure man, but this is not a "counter example." TCP/IP exists only because Microsoft does not care that it exists. There is no money to be made or marketshare to be lost. If TCP/IP somehow negatively affected Microsoft's utter dominance of the computer OS marketplace (as Netscape briefly did) then MS would develop their own version, tie it to Windows, and that would be the end of TCP/IP.
MS has a huge profit engine with Windows. The computer industry is utterly tied to it and as long as this is the case, MS could care less what open standards evolve that do not threaten this engine.
Apple, right or wrong, is trying to create a similar profit machine with iTMS/FairPlay/iPod.
The music issue (as we have seen) will be a money maker for someone. Right now, the profit is in the hardware (just like with the PC industry years ago) but once the hardware becomes commoditized, the profit will shift to the software end.
And, don't kid yourself, MS will never allow that money to flow away from their coffers if they can possibly help it.
The relevant question in any of these discussions is this: do you want a world with MS in control of both the OS market and the digtal music market or a world with Apple in control of the digital music market. Because, as I said before, someone *will* end up in control. I'd prefer it be Apple.
I'd love some pollyanna-ish world where open standards reigned, music was free, and gumdrops fell from the sky like raindrops, but it ain't gonna happen.
eskatonia said:
Sure man, but this is not a "counter example." TCP/IP exists only because Microsoft does not care that it exists. There is no money to be made or marketshare to be lost. If TCP/IP somehow negatively affected Microsoft's utter dominance of the computer OS marketplace (as Netscape briefly did) then MS would develop their own version, tie it to Windows, and that would be the end of TCP/IP.
MS has a huge profit engine with Windows. The computer industry is utterly tied to it and as long as this is the case, MS could care less what open standards evolve that do not threaten this engine.
Apple, right or wrong, is trying to create a similar profit machine with iTMS/FairPlay/iPod.
The music issue (as we have seen) will be a money maker for someone. Right now, the profit is in the hardware (just like with the PC industry years ago) but once the hardware becomes commoditized, the profit will shift to the software end.
And, don't kid yourself, MS will never allow that money to flow away from their coffers if they can possibly help it.
The relevant question in any of these discussions is this: do you want a world with MS in control of both the OS market and the digtal music market or a world with Apple in control of the digital music market. Because, as I said before, someone *will* end up in control. I'd prefer it be Apple.
I'd love some pollyanna-ish world where open standards reigned, music was free, and gumdrops fell from the sky like raindrops, but it ain't gonna happen.
ITR 81 said:
Real are talking about starting to sell AACs so you can play them on your iPod but buy from them rather than iTunes. If you had a Rio, you wouldn't be buying AAC versions anyhow so you'd still have to repurchase to move them to the iPod
Hell, it's like telling a lame kid to keep away from your girlfriend and yet you find them frenching in the coat closet. And then he "did" her.narco said:
Exactly. But I have a feeling once the iPod becomes a bigger product and has a larger installed base and rep, the DRM will get opened. At this point, both the iTunes store and iPod work together to sell eachother, and compatibility with the store is one thing that helps to sell the iPod, just like compatibility is what sells windows. I think after a certain amount of time, the iPod would be able to sell itself, but at this point, I think they want to establish thier business and market first (remember apple didn't even want DRM in the first place but the labels woudn't have it any other way); plus I think steve must get a fun sense of irony/pleasure for people scrambling to be compatible with his platform for a change...SiliconAddict said:
eSnow said:
A bit misinformed today, aren't we?
HP stated after the 4G iPod launch that the hPod will be shipping in September, with the 4G form factor; they said they were waiting for the initial 4G iPod release.
Also, why should HP rebrand the iTMS? They've been shipping iTMS with most of their HP and Compaq boxes since March, so what good would rebranding do?
Photorun said:
Apple's current market share numbers have more to do with not aggressively seeking the business market and their "Computers for the rest of us" early marketing than they have to do with their closed but extremely well oiled machine. Trust me, in the early days, had apple aggressively approached the corporate market and laid claim the world would be a different place now.