USB Compliance Organization Sides With Apple in Palm Pre Syncing Dispute

[BaldiMac]

None of the products you mention involve leveraging dominant market share in one market to compete in another. You clearly don't understand what I've been saying.

And you clearly don't understand what you just posted. The only significant market that Apple has a large enough market share to be labeled dominant is the digital music player market. And as that market is opening up to competition from smartphone growth (not many people carry an iPod and iPhone), Apple's "dominance" of the market is receding.

Your implication seems to be that their 70% market share in the legal, online digital music download market is another such market. But they compete in digital music sales not only with CD retailers but also with illegal file sharing.

Regardless, they are not leveraging either of these markets in the Palm Pre syncing situation. Palm has unhindered access to iTunes+ music purchased from the iTunes Store. The only "market" that Apple is "leveraging" is the highly contested and valuable "free media sync software" market.

Not much effort involved, Fairplay won't decrypt devices not armed with the decryption keys. Palm doesn't have that and can't get it without Apple giving them.

Except through hacking. But no one would seriously consider that Palm would hack Apple software without permission.

 

[pdjudd]

Yeah, I agree. I didn't mean to counter the whole argument. Just that one particular statement.

Right. It just seems that a large portion of this whole debate seems to surround arguments that what Apple is doing against Palm is somehow grounds for anti competitive actions where they seem to inevitable mention that Apple has some kind of monopoly in the music market (as if that was even reliant). I am not saying that you are countering the whole argument, just a big part of it.

The closest example that I can think of is the Psystar case where people were again screaming "Anti-competitive!" and "Microsoft part 2" when Psystar made a ridiculous argument that Apple had a monopoly in the "Mac Market". Complete bogus and yet people stil touted it after we calmly stated that "Mac computers" was not a relevant market and "computers" was. It even got tossed out in court and people still tried to argue it.

 

[pdjudd]

Except through hacking. But no one would seriously consider that Palm would hack Apple software without permission.

It would be interesting. Apple would have a really strong DMCA case against Palm if they tried it and the record labels would not be happy either. In other words, its plan B for Palm!

 

[dejo]

I am not saying that you are countering the whole argument, just a big part of it.

The fact that Apple iTunes is the #1 music retailer in the US but only sells 25% (which means 75% is sold by others) doesn't seem to me to counter a big part of the whole argument. It kinda supports it. That is, there is plenty of competition in music sales. I think we are trying to say the same thing but I am just not being very eloquent at it.

 

[pdjudd]

The fact that Apple iTunes is the #1 music retailer in the US but only sells 25% (which means 75% is sold by others) doesn't seem to me to counter a big part of the whole argument. It kinda supports it. That is, there is plenty of competition in music sales. I think we are trying to say the same thing but I am just not being very eloquent at it.

We are saying the same thing. The argument that I am countering is the silly notion of some kind of ant-competitive monopoly Apple is supposedly engaging in.

Your link showed that on a grand scale (namely CD's) Apple is not a dominant player - just in one particular segment of a while. Having 70% of digital sales and being the number one seller with a 25% market share shows that there is massive competition and the fact that Apple doesn't have anywhere near the power that people try to place. They are a big player, but they aren't the only one there.

 

[KnightWRX]

We are saying the same thing. The argument that I am countering is the silly notion of some kind of ant-competitive monopoly Apple is supposedly engaging in.

Exactly, the only guy arguing on the other side is docholid. But he's also tying iTunes' market share to iTMS' market share, so that goes to show you his level of comprehension of the whole thing.

 

[pdjudd]

Exactly, the only guy arguing on the other side is docholid.

Well to be fair, there have been tons of other people who have spouted such nonsense before. Really, the conclusions made by the USB consortium should have come to no surprise to anybody. Palm tried to be all huffy and cry to mommy that big scary Apple wasn't playing fair and they got punished instead when the IC found that Palm kicked sand in Apple's face and Apple fought back. It happens.

 

[docholid]

Exactly, the only guy arguing on the other side is docholid. But he's also tying iTunes' market share to iTMS' market share, so that goes to show you his level of comprehension of the whole thing.

Sigh. If you don't think there's a link between people using iTunes to manage music, the fact that the iTunes Store accounts for 25% of all music sales (and 70% of online music sales), and the fact that iTunes is the only way to actually download that music, then I don't know what to tell you. Are people able to choose other music management software? Absolutely. Are the likely to do so on average? No. There doesn't seem to be any survey data that tells us either way that I can find, but you seem confident that a great many people turn away from iTunes just because there's a variety of anecdotal evidence among people who comment in forums like these that they do. That's not anything like a reasonable sample.

If we just look at the other side of the equation, Apple also enjoys broad dominance in portable media players (I believe some 70%+ as well). All of these people at least have iTunes as well. So, with tight integration with both the iTunes Store and the established hardware base, iTunes is indispensable for a huge portion of the digital music userbase.

You can call me a crank if you like. It doesn't change the fact that Apple enjoys immense market power in music distribution at present. With sales of physical media receding, and other online distributors unable to make serious inroads thus far, their influence will likely increase. Coupled with their zeal for tight vertical integration, this is going to end up being bad for competition and bad for consumers.

 

[pdjudd]

You can call me a crank if you like. It doesn't change the fact that Apple enjoys immense market power in music distribution at present.

If they only sell 25% of all the music out there it means they are really popular. It also means that 75% of all music is being sold in some other fashion. Their market power is not "immense". Not when there are still very heavy hitters in the market. Someone has to be the top dog and that happens to be Apple right now. That doesn't necessarily translate into anything else.

If we just look at the other side of the equation, Apple also enjoys broad dominance in portable media players (I believe some 70%+ as well)

None of which requires the iTunes music store to get that way. True, I have to have iTunes to actually make an iPod useful, but that is the case regardless of the player - a software layer has to exist somewhere.

So, with tight integration with both the iTunes Store and the established hardware base, iTunes is indispensable for a huge portion of the digital music userbase.

I (and many others) contend that this success is largely due to Apple getting the right (and legal) business model. The iPod did well because it was a well made player (even before iTunes crossed over to Windows). iTunes did well before the store because it was a quality player). The iTMS succeeded because it was a good business platform that customers liked.

That, to me sounds like Apple succeeded in a market based on its own merits by making a better mousetrap than everybody else. That is the goal of business.

 

[BaldiMac]

It doesn't change the fact that Apple enjoys immense market power in music distribution at present. With sales of physical media receding, and other online distributors unable to make serious inroads thus far, their influence will likely increase.

25% market share in the legal music distribution market does not equal "immense market power" in the terms of antitrust law. And that percentage ignores significant competition from illegal file sharing.

And, again, Apple is not leveraging their music market share in this situation. Apple does not prevent anyone from accessing music and playlists within iTunes. There is no barrier to competition. Palm can come in tomorrow with a competitor to iTunes.

Coupled with their zeal for tight vertical integration, this is going to end up being bad for competition and bad for consumers.

Why is it bad for consumers to have the option to choose a vertically integrated model?

 

[cumanzor]

Ad hominum

You are joking, aren't you?

 

[pdjudd]

You are joking, aren't you?

No, calling people names just to dismiss them is a ad hominum attack. It also is bad form.

 

[czachorski]

Sigh. If you don't think there's a link between people using iTunes to manage music, the fact that the iTunes Store accounts for 25% of all music sales (and 70% of online music sales), and the fact that iTunes is the only way to actually download that music, then I don't know what to tell you.

The bolded part is factually incorrect. I and millions of others legally buy and download music from Amazon all the time, bring it into iTunes, and play it on our iPods. Amazon even has a nifty little free app that makes the process easy.

 

[charlituna]

You're not forced into buying an iPod to use content that is iPod exclusive, bought exclusively on the iTunes store. With DRM-free music being the norm now, any player that supports AAC can play back iTunes bought music.

I'm listening to an album I just bought on the itunes store 20 minutes ago and I'm not using an ipod.

and not only that, but I can use any number of programs to take a track and convert it within minutes to any form I want. mp3, wav, wma, whatever. play it on anything.

 

[TiggsPanther]

Why is it bad for consumers to have the option to choose a vertically integrated model?

This is something I want to ask every time people criticise Apple's business model or product lineup.

Do I think Apple is the best, friendliest, most perfect commpany? Hell, no. Are there things I wish they did differently? Definitely?
But despite all this, I (personally) find that their products work well precisely because of how Apple do them.

I like that iPod/iTunes is a tightly integrated system. There are other (probably better) ways of music management, playback and synchronisation out there. But I find that the whole package works together really well. If I repalce my iPod with a non iPod (or sart using my music on my PSP or G1 phone), i'll have to find another way of syncing. So be it. (DoubleTwist looks interesting - I may well look into t for my other gadgets.)

I think that, despite the limited mac lineup, the Mac works so well for me because I've had far less of the crashes and compatibility/stability niggles that I deal with when I use Windows or Linux.
And yes, I use all three operating systems regularly. Windows for universal compatibility. Linux as it is totally open. Mac for greater stabilty and overall better experience. (Not 100% perfect, and not without some pet peeves - I want an iPod with a physical offswitch dammit... But simply "better" in my eyes.)

To me, the "closed system" is a choice. To be used instead or or even as well as more open alternatives. People seem to think that "not use it" is not a choice. But it is. Maybe not a preferable choice, but a chioce nonetheless.
Similarly, some of us choose the closed sysem (despite the flaws) because of something it brings. And to me, some of Apple's products work well precisely because they're so locked down. I weigh up the pros and cons. And I decided that the Apple pros outweigh the Apple cons.

Back to the thread (and comment I'm following up), I find the iPod works so well for me exactly because it's vertically integrated with iTunes. The whole package "just works" for my needs.
I made a choice for the closed-system option. So I don't get why the "but I want to be able to choose" people want to deny others the chance to choose it. Yes, it sucks if you want one aspect of the iFamily and not the rest. But there are other things out there. But all-in-one is a choice. And some of us actually appreciate it.

 

[kdarling]

Well, well.

The Missing Sync is now available for the Pre, with iTunes integration as well.

Perhaps Palm should make a deal with mark/space.

 

[Stratus Fear]

Well, well.

The Missing Sync is now available for the Pre, with iTunes integration as well.

Perhaps Palm should make a deal with mark/space.

And finally, the correct solution is presented

 

[Mark Booth]

Well, well.

The Missing Sync is now available for the Pre, with iTunes integration as well.

Perhaps Palm should make a deal with mark/space.

What do you know about that!! A way to sync without spoofing iTunes into thinking you're an iPod! One has to seriously question a company (Palm) that didn't decide to take this route in the first place. Idiots!

Mark

 

[kate-willbury]

i think this is great! i'm hoping this will force people to actually find out about other desktop media players that are all generally miles ahead of the bloat that is itunes.

just two examples that are way better than itunes:

mediamonkey
songbird

 

[pdjudd]

And look! They even offer features that iTunes does not (wireless sync)! How scandalous that someone should try to compete using innovation!

Seriously, This product is the most obvious solution - and its one that Apple isn't going to shut down.

 

[Stratus Fear]

And look! They even offer features that iTunes does not (wireless sync)! How scandalous that someone should try to compete using innovation!

Seriously, This product is the most obvious solution - and its one that Apple isn't going to shut down.

Wireless sync is seriously something I wish Apple would do with the iPhone/iPod touch.

 

[pdjudd]

Wireless sync is seriously something I wish Apple would do with the iPhone/iPod touch.

I wouldn't mind it if we could control who could sync with a system like how the remote app works that would have to be configured during a plug in or something, otherwise it would be heck for other iPhone users who would be in my house.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Not sure if this has been mentioned or even if it's relevant ... but I'll put it out there for thought.

Can anyone confirm if older iTS music (with DRM) will load onto a Pre masquerading as an iPod?

Perhaps this is what Apple is trying to prevent from happening. The original terms of iTS purchases was that you could load to any number of iPods. If Pre's are pretending to be iPods and loading DRM'd songs onto the Pre is a violation of the terms Apple agreed to with the music labels, then wouldn't Apple be in violation?

Could it be that Apple has to make an effort to prevent these songs from loading onto non-iPods?

No, the Pre will not sync any fairplay encrypted songs.

 

[ftaok]

Well, well.

The Missing Sync is now available for the Pre, with iTunes integration as well.

Perhaps Palm should make a deal with mark/space.

And ironically, the latest Palm Pre software update breaks the Missing Sync support.

j/k

 

[slolifesux]

ppl should be mad at palm for spoofing their product as an apple product. when you bought a pre, you bought a palm product not an apple product. yet the vendor id is apple???? how can anyone be upset that apple put a stop to a company stealing their vendor id? use your head, anyone of us would do the same exact thing.