“A good friend of mine recently sent me a 9-page argument for why he’s using Rhapsody rather than an iPod/iTunes, and why he’s sticking with Windows rather than trying out a Macintosh,” Leland Scott writes on the “Musings from Mars” blog. A quote from Scott’s friend:
It also appears to me that with the iPod and iTunes, Apple is engaging in just the kind of predatory behavior you accuse Microsoft of (i.e., refusing to license other manufacturers to produce players that play AAC songs). No surprise there; all corporations strive to be monopolists if they think they can get away with it. So far, Microsoft has simply been more successful.
“Now, where do you suppose my friend got this impression? It comes directly from the FUD (fear, uncertainly, and doubt) seeded by Microsoft and its minions who are trying to–but so far, thankfully, failing to–control the world’s digital music with a proprietary format called Windows Media Audio (WMA). An amazingly stupid example of this kind of FUD appears in a Time Magazine article this week called “Attack of the Anti-iPods” by someone called “Time Morrison.” (Do you think his/her first name is really “Time”? But that’s what it says here…) In this article, Ms./Mr. Morrison opens his/her analysis with a breezy reference to “the proprietary digital-music format that joins you at the hip to Apple’s iTunes online store” as one of the negatives of the iPod experience,” Scott writes.
“Now, I would have thought someone writing for Time magazine about digital music players would know better. In fact, it’s the fact that they don’t know better that makes me suspicious of their motives. Because, as a matter of fact, Apple does not have a proprietary digital-music format,” Scott writes. “The fact is that the company that has a proprietary digital music format is Microsoft, not Apple. Microsoft’s format is known as Windows Media Audio, or WMA. Unlike AAC, which is an industry standard not owned by a single company, WMA can only be licensed from Microsoft, and Microsoft alone gets the fees from that licensing. It costs developers nothing to license AAC for use in software products, and use of AAC as a consumer keeps you from once again tying your technological future to a single company–that is, Microsoft.”
In his article, Scott reminds us that “you don’t have to use the iTunes music store just because you have an iPod” and that he thinks that the “Time writer was being phony on other fronts as well. For example, the iPod can play many formats other than AAC–in fact, it can play virtually all industry-standard digital music formats.”
Full article here.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Time Magazine pops iPod’s ‘pimples’ and examines ‘fetching’ new iPod ‘killers’ – April 04, 2005
The de facto standard for legal digital online music files: Apple’s protected MPEG-4 Audio (.m4p) – December 15, 2004
Music now comes in different formats, with different quality, at different price points. The industry is changing. What is the problem with that. Hey, with DVD you can get wide screen or full screen. Soon we will have high definition music. The whole idea that your player must play my music is ludicrous. Welcome to the future. Get used to it.
The author is playing with words. True, AAC is not propietary, but Apple’s DRM is. Hence songs purchased from iTunes can only be played on an iPod. Not saying that it’s a bad thing, but the author’s message is decieving.
Unfortunately, the rebuttal is on someone’s blog, and the original FUD is in Time magazine. Sigh. It would be nice if long-time Mac guy Stephen Levy could do a more fitting rebuttal in his column in Newsweek.
The key is that you don’t have to use iTMS to use iTunes and iPod. You can still buy CDs.
If you want to buy online music, then you’re tied to iTMS if you want to use an iPod. Though I have a number of MP3 files purchased from Wippit. In fact, I have more Wippit tacks than iTMS tracks. For the most part though, DRM free CDs remain the sensible choice.
In fact, Wippit pretty much defeats the argument that you’re tied to iTMS. Wippit is awful to navigate, but it’s useful for proving a point.
FUD or no FUD, what it’s about has nada to do with who sells and services which encoding scheme. What it’s about is who ended up becoming the primary data management system of choice for the unprecedented and truly massive pre-existing music libraries that are now sitting on the hard drives of every Joe Blow and his cousin. And guess which company it turned out to be?
It’s a done deal. Apple won. You gotta love it.
Wippit, there are a variety of other music download sites with DRM free songs that play on iPod, which also have a more difficult interface than iTMS. However, they generally have content that none of the other mostly-the-same major sites have.
RE: Hello –
Not only that, but he mentions that developers don’t have to ‘pay’ to use AAC – it is a licensed technology that software and hardware developers have to pay to use.
The cost is 17 cents per channel per unit for hardware or software decoders if you have between 5,000,001 units and 10,000,000 units. (ie- 34 cents each for stereo.)
More details available here:http://www.vialicensing.com/products/mpeg4aac/license.terms.html
Not to be a fly in the ointment here, and let me preface this by saying I do not like Real, Glasser, or RealPlayer. They are banned from my Mac.
But Real did sell a competing product to the iTMS that would work with iTunes and iPods. Yet Apple subsequently killed that compatibility.
I didn’t authorize Apple to tell me which songs I can and cannont play on MY Mac or iPod. Sure it can do what it wants with iTMS, after all it is their store, but once they sold me the iPod and my Mac, they became mine. I should be able to put whatever songs I want on them. Now I understand that Apple has no obligation to make a device compatible with every tom, dick and harry format out there, but for heavens sake, if someone comes up with a format that works, with a DRM that works for them and on MY device, then Apple has no business breaking it at a later time.
my 2¢
Zac
“I didn’t authorize Apple to tell me which songs I can and cannont play”…
Apple sold you an iPod and told you up front what formats it would play, making no promises to you that it would support third party hacks. Caveat Emptor.
ok, maczac, you’ve forgotten about the RIAA again.
whether or not musicians actually get the money, their copyright is still the only way for them to secure their intellectual property.
if apple, as a company, was going to sell the song “happy birthday” to you via iTunes, they would have to wrap it in DRM.
you don’t like DRM, buy the CD. then nobody can tell you what to do with it. they’ve made sure you paid the money for the music.
finally, what Real “sold” – as opposed to give away – was software which circumvented Apple’s contract to the RIAA. so, is that a “competing product”? if so, blatant piracy is also a “competing product.” what the hell did you expect them to do?
get a clue. you don’t like DRM – apple or otherwise? buy the CDs!
As far as the DRMed solutions go…
WMA = Windows-only
AAC = Mac, Windows and Linux (via CodeWeavers)
Non DRM solutions…
MP3 = all platforms
AAC = all platforms
OGG = all platforms
WMA = Windows (and laughable support for Mac)
So which is more proprietary?!
Well, well…
I am not talking about that, read my post.
Apple intentionally broke a 3rd party format that prior to them breaking it worked on an iPod. This is exactly the sort of thing that MS does. I for one, don’t like it.
If some enterprising sort comes out with a product, heretofore unknown that happens to work with a product that I own. Then Apple has no business tell me I can not use that.
Michael, I haven’t forgotten about he RIAA (again?). As far as I knew, know and understand, Reals product had some form of DRM. Apple threw a hissy fit, because it didn’t want a competing store working with “its” iPod. Well let me tell you something, once Apple sells me “its” iPod, it is no longer theirs, but mine. If I choose to use the iTMS, (which I do, because I find it superior) so be it, but if someone else wants to use another store, that has found a way to interface with the iPod, then so be it too. Apple has no business breaking that after the fact.
Buying the CD has absolutely nothing to do with this issue.
What bothers me about all of these iPod articles (aside from there being so many compared to the meager number of articles about Macs) is that it seems like people are a little vicious about any claims of unfair practices by Apple.
Whether Apple’s DRM scheme is monopolistic or not is a subtle question, but a lot of people seem content just to claim that Microsoft=monopolistic and Apple=pluralistic. I’m tempted to believe that if Microsoft had a successful online store that sold songs that only work on Windows-branded hardware, we’d be jumping all over them as being “monopolistic.” (In fact, that’s exactly what we are doing these days.)
Personally, I have no problem with the Apple DRM model, but let’s let people debate about it instead of crucifying anyone who claims Apple might do something that is less than nice to its customers.
Similarly, it makes my skin crawl when people crow about how great it is that Apple totally dominates the MP3 player market, but get all upset that Microsoft dominates the computer market. Why is domination good for one company and bad for another? I hate Microsoft and love Apple as much as the next guy, but it seems like we are being a little hypocritical.
“The author is playing with words. True, AAC is not propietary, but Apple’s DRM is….the author’s message is decieving.”
The author is not being deceiving; he makes it quite clear in the column that Apple’s DRM is proprietary. It helps if you actually RTFA:
“The only thing proprietary about Apple’s solution is the DRM (digital rights management) system encoded in the AAC files you buy from the iTunes music store.” [Author’s emphasis]
yawn.. sticking with a WMP/Muvo combo to spite all the iPod lovers.. how positively UN-capitalist of you..
pffft…
Apple’s not forcing anyone to get an iPod.. and yet look at that marketshare..
PREDATORY BEHAVIOUR?! YOU MEAN ADVERTISING?
Puh-lease.. If this was about predatory practices, they would have done the smart thing and licensed their DRM… they’re stubborn.. not cunning.
“Why is domination good for one company and bad for another?”
Because if it is due to the fact that your product is superior and users CHOOSE to buy your product and nothing else, then it is GOOD.
If it is due because you FORCE competitors to use YOUR technology otherwise YOU crush THEM so that users CANNOT choose anything BUT your stuff, for how crappy it is then it is BAD.
Monopolistic bully action is when you FORCE your competitors to adopt your technology. Apple is doing exactly the OPPOSITE. It KEEPS competitors FROM using its technology so to be the one offering the BEST product.
Capish?
Not too difficult.
Those complaining about Apple “breaking” Real’s iPod compatibility seem to forget that Real went about it in an underhanded way. After Apple officially knocked them back they went ahead and reverse-engineered it anyway. That puts them on the same level as hackers
Get a cream for your skin and look in the dictionary for MONOPOLY. Then, maybe, you’ll understand BAD and GOOD dominion of a market.
MacJack, crackers, not hackers. But let’s not start a flame on words
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Time getting even for Apple giving Newsweek an exclusive on the iPod last year?
I’ll probably get lynched for this….
So, my iPod plays music of different formats? Does that mean I can listen to country AND western music?
I am being good today and provide you the definition for monopoly so to stop this silly thing of comparing Apple dominance with iPod with MS monopolistic actions in the OS.
MONOPOLY:
The exclusive power, or privilege of selling a commodity;
the exclusive power, right, or privilege of dealing in
some article, or of trading in some market;
Clues:
SOME ARTICLE is music player, not iPod. Everyone can produce and sell a music player. Apple is not forcing competitors in using iPod technology. The market is REWARDING iPod quality, not COERCED to buy it.
SOME MARKET is online music service, not iTMS. Apple is not forcing competitors in adopting iTMS as music service to sell music.
Let’s stop even at hinting Apple being a monopoly in digital music market. They are offering the BEST products and the market rewards them.
hehehe: A ROPE AND A TALL TREE. NOW!
LOL
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Okay, iPodder, I get that you think Apple and Microsoft are different. I agree.
What I object to is jumping all over anyone who even QUESTIONS Apple’s policies. Apple is open to scrutiny, as anyone else is.
I’m afraid you proved my point quite well by the way you jumped all over me. I wasn’t even saying Apple is a monopoly, I was just saying let people talk about it if they want to, since most things aren’t black and white.
“Let’s stop even at hinting Apple being a monopoly”…I couldn’t have wished for a better example of what I am objecting to.
“Get a cream for your skin”? No idea what that means.
And back on topic: Yes, ITMS and iPod are both non-monopoly products. But when you start tying products together in dependent ways (remember Internet Explorer and Windows?), the lines start to get fuzzier. What’s the harm in discussing that?
I’ve bought one, count ’em one, song from ITMS.
All the songs I like to listen to were made before many of you reading this were even born and I bought the CD’s long before iTunes was even a dream. To read the reviews you’d get the impression that I listen to that one song over and over and over again.