You've just described exactly why a Monopoly isn't capitalism. Because Monopolies can prop up poor products by artificial means, by abusing their monopoly in one market to gain advantages in another.
So in essence, you agree with me.
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.
Zune HD
- Thread starter gan6660
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You've just described exactly why a Monopoly isn't capitalism. Because Monopolies can prop up poor products by artificial means, by abusing their monopoly in one market to gain advantages in another.
So in essence, you agree with me.
Except that never happens. MS has a windows monopoly but can't seem to transfer that monopoly to other products.
Apple doesn't have a monopoly in computer hardware but yet out of nowhere has a dominant monopoly in PMPs.
A good product will sell well and a bad product won't even if the producer is a monopoly or not.
Uh, then why have they been convicted of doing exactly that in 2 instances (once by the US DOJ and the other by the EU) ?
Are you like, living in an alternate universe or something ? There's plenty of examples where Microsoft abused their monopoly.
Is that why iTunes on Windows is so awful then?
I don't see the monopoly in your example. There are plenty of Music stores around, all with decent market share.
But doesn't iTunes have 70% of the market or am I missing something here? I think the next biggest are Wal-Mart and Amazon both with sub 10% market shares.
97% of people who download music online, download it from iTunes. That's a bigger monopoly than MS and Windows.
Source: http://www.appleinsider.com/article...ation_point_for_ipod_itunes_use_by_teens.html
But market share alone doesn't make it a monopoly per se - iTunes exist in a market that has competition. Yes the competition isn't all that effective, but that has nothing to do with Apple. They just produce a better product. Apple doesn't force you to use their store. They force you to use their software, but thats not illegal either. You can posess an iPod and never buy a single thing from iTunes and nothing would be different. Apple offers several benefits to using their services, but that remains a consumer choice that turns out is really popular.
Microsoft deliberately used one monopoly (windows) to leverage out other competitors by forcing IE on them in exclusion to alternate browsers that was superior (Netscape) making browser business models impossible. That was wrong and they were sued for it. The closest equivalence is Apple making OSX so that you could not install firefox without great difficulty and even that is not close.
97% of people who download music online, download it from iTunes. That's a bigger monopoly than MS and Windows.
Source: http://www.appleinsider.com/article...ation_point_for_ipod_itunes_use_by_teens.html
Ah, it seems that you need to revise your definition of "monopoly". A monopoly is a situation when a supplier of a good or service can significantly control how it's used, what is used, with whom it's used, and how much is used. The usual case is that when there is a sole supplier and no significant competitors.
Apple, at this moment, you see, is not the only supplier; with Amazon, Yahooo, eMusic, Napster, Rhapsody, and other suppliers, and that the product is only music, (mp3 or aac or other audio files), it is an oligopoly. Should, say, Apple change it's pricing, consumers can easily buy music from another supplier; now even easier because of the lack of DRM. Also notice the way Apple's competitors quickly followed suit when Apple changed their pricing; that is another trait of an oligopoly.
Please. If you try to introduce economic concepts to your posts, please, I implore you, know what you're talking about.
As does Windows, Office and IE.
As a user of both products I find it strange that people harp on about MS's abuse of its monopoly - for which it was rightly fined - whilst completely ignoring the massive amount of influence that iTunes had - and continues to have - on the download market.
It just seems a bit odd.
Yes they did. First, see what happened to Netscape. Second, see what happened with XBox (Live?). Third, MSN Messenger vs ICQ, AIM. Then Windows Media Player (that failed, but it's a notable try.). Oh, and a more recent example; Silverlight. List goes on and on.
As for your last statement (underlined), that is sometimes the case when a supplier doesn't control any substitutes. In this case, Microsoft controls software, and is trying to extend control from their software to hardware (Windows Media to Zunes)
Again, the difference is when Microsoft delivered IE, they packaged it nicely with Windows. That, is abuse of the market; they use their control (plz read my post about monopolies above) over one aspect of the market to extend their control further into the industry.
If, say, Apple forces everyone to use their headphones so that you can hear the music clearer, then it's abusing it's monopoly (even though Apple doesn't have one). But that wouldn't happen and cannot happen, since it's only a oligopoly and consumers have a choice.
I think you don't know what socialism means. Socialism is just a broad range of control that can be exerted over an economy...
Regulated capitalism is sometimes called a "mixed economy"... That is what most economies are today.
This is what makes me giggle. These same people will get Snow Leopard and not think twice about all the loot they are giving MS (gotta love Apple adding Exchange Support into the OS). No way of getting around that one...
By that logic Windows is not a monopoly since there are other alternative OS's out there and no one is forcing you to buy Windows. You can always go and buy a Mac.
There is no denying that Apple has leveraged its monopoly in PMP to gain another monopoly in online music distribution.
97% of people who download music online, download it from iTunes. That's a bigger monopoly than MS and Windows.
Source: http://www.appleinsider.com/article...ation_point_for_ipod_itunes_use_by_teens.html
According to your graph, Amazon and Wal-mart have sold exactly 0 songs for Spring-09, and have been on a steady decline since before they were even open.
Funny how that works.
EDIT : Oh right, that's the TEEN survey thing. By all means, find some real market data before spouting things about the Apple monopoly on online music download sales.
EDIT2: Other things to consider, iTunes isn't tied to the iPod and vice versa. The iPod can easily be synced by 3rd party software with songs bought on Amazon/Wal-mart/ripped from your own CDs, etc.. Songs downloaded from the iTunes music store can be played in any media player or PMP that supports AAC (now that fairplay is not in the picture anymore).
Hence, even if Apple did have a monopoly, they haven't tied their products together. There is no monopoly abuse here, even if there was a monopoly in the first place.
Oh but the same page also contains another chart that shows that teens are only considering at buying an iPod next and many of you seem to take it at face value. Funny how that works. Denial much?
After the comments regarding the recent Microsoft ads and now this, I'm beginning to wonder if this is becoming "MSRumors".*
* I'm sure panties will be in a bunch after my comment, so I'll preface my comment by stating: Yes, I use Windows, yes I like both, yes people can be on MacRumors and still like Windows, no I'm not a fanboy, no I don't hate Windows, yes I believe Mac's are expensive for similar hardware" etc. etc. etc.
However, again, this is a site dedicated for people who [generally] prefer Apple and OS X systems. There are plenty of Microsoft sites out there, but the recent influx of MS commentators who are all too eager to bait people into 3,000+ comments about Microsoft being good and Apple people being "fanboys" need to really give it a rest.
I think the issue is that Macrumors should look at its title and realise that they should not really be posting Microsoft news. I mean this thread is a Microsoft rumor and not a Mac rumor.
Solution: Stop posting anything MS related.
Teens are only 1 portion of the market. I don't take that survey any seriously, are you just lumping people that are disagreeing with you as a "Apple fan" group that all share the same opinion ? Because it seems to me you are.
They sure get mad when you tend to point them out too
Anuba, Aidenshaw, mosx and whitefang didn't like at all getting called astroturfers and the venom in their replies showed it hit a little too close to home.I wonder how BMWfan will react.
That I'll agree with you. The Zune HD "rumor" (not even a product announcement) is hardly consequential to Mac or Apple in general for now. When the product is released and touted as a competitor to the iPod Touch or whatever it'll aim at, then yes, I could see this on this site, like the ads that target directly Apple.
You've got to read and understand what I say before picking on my fine details, mate.
First off before I continue, let me explain the fundamental concept of demand:
The quantity of a good or service that a consumer is able to and willing to buy at a certain price at a certain time
People cannot switch from Windows because of the relative difficulty of learning a new OS and the availability of an OS that can do what they need it to do;and that there is product differentiation—audio files are audio files, each can be theoretically changed into the other, but Linux distros are not the same as Windows, they are not compatible with each other's software. Most Linux distros does not have the large enough user base to make it worth using or that there is enough good software to convince people to switch. Then we end up with the other category of OS, OS X. This one, there's a price barrier. Because Apple classifies OS X as part of the device (the Mac; Apple calls it selling "the whole widget"), it allows Apple to charge more for the hardware—differentiation from other manufacturers, so Apple's product should be classed as a differentiated substitute; also, OS X cannot run Windows programs, and Windows cannot run OS X's Apps—product differentiation. This makes it difficult for customers to switch (thus affecting the customer's ability to use another OS).
Apple, however does not have the hold on it's customers than Microsoft has. Apple only sell audio files (little or no product differentiation?), and if they raise the price or screw their customers, the customers can and will will buy from another supplier. There's nothing that can stop them; they can still play their music that they bought, they can still play another other music through iTunes, etc. Thus, when there is little or no product differentiation, no barriers between competitors, then it's an oligopoly. Thus the customer is able to purchase music from another supplier
Wholeheartedly Agree!
It's getting almost comical to see the Microsoft lovers here trashing Apple and all of their products, then getting their panties in a wad when we attempt to defend our choice to buy Apple products. All of this b*tching and moaning is just STUPID at this point.
MEMO TO MICROSOFT LOVERS: THIS IS AN APPLE FORUM, WE LIKE APPLE PRODUCTS, WE DISCUSS APPLE PRODUCTS BECAUSE WE LIKE THEM, AND WE BUY APPLE PRODUCTS BECAUSE WE LIKE THEM AND CAN AFFORD THEM. Is that so difficult for you people to understand?? If so, here's a dramatic interpretation that may help...
Man: "I'd like to order the Chardonnay, please."
Waiter: "Sir, I think you should get the Merlot instead, it's cheaper and you get 1/3 more."
Man: "Thanks, but, I don't like Merlot, I prefer Chardonnay."
Waiter: "Don't be an elitist Chardonnay fanboy! The Merlot is way better. It has a gold-foil label and a nice green tint to the bottle. Plus you get more and it has a higher alcohol content. What's not to like!?"
Waiter: "Sir, I think you should get the Merlot instead, it's cheaper and you get 1/3 more."
Man: "Thanks, but, I don't like Merlot, I prefer Chardonnay."
Waiter: "Don't be an elitist Chardonnay fanboy! The Merlot is way better. It has a gold-foil label and a nice green tint to the bottle. Plus you get more and it has a higher alcohol content. What's not to like!?"
this looks cool. And I feel sorry for all the people who think it is ugly just because microsoft designed it. grow up people. yes microsoft has made ugly products, but so has apple. In fact, apple uses the most hideous stands on all of their monitors/imacs.