[MW Forums]

Apple Computer Inc. has updated the software for some of its iPod music players so that songs bought from RealNetworks Inc. won't play. RealNetworks says they're not sure why it's happened, but they're working on a fix. Apple suggests that it's what to expect if you use music that isn't officially supported on the iPod. more

[SeaFox]

Like word processors trying to create 100% MS Word compatable files, Real will continue to find themselves at the disadvantage, always trying to catch up.
The problem is, when it comes to MS Word compatability, it's possible to be "compatable enough" that your customers can do all they want to, but for Real, their Harmony technology either is comapatble or not, there's no room to be only partially compliant.
The big question is, how many interruptions of compatablity are Harmony using iPod oweners willing to put up. I'd say Real gets two more "we'll have a fix here shortly's" before people start giving up and going with a store they KNOW will work with their player.

[jdb8167]

In reply to:

---

"Any time there are changes made to FairPlay we have to evaluate it to see how Harmony works with it," said Graves.

---

How does this square with the fact that it has taken over a month for this to even get noticed? Are they really concerned about their "customers" or is this purely meant to create press releases?
This whole thing is ridiculous. If it takes over a month for anyone to even notice that there is a change that creates a compatibility problem, how many people are even using Harmony?

[schalliol]

This sends a message to iPod owners buying from Real, "We've done it once, we may do it again. Don't invest in something that <I>might</i> not continue to work. I think the market will realize this.

[heisetax]

This just shows you that APple is just as bad (or does many feel good) as Microsoft when it comes to orotecting their "Monopoly" or should we be nice & say "Insider BUsiness Advantage." I thought the Mac was about being different. Apple is just the same as MIcrosoft, just a little smaller.
Bill the TaxMan

[adobephile]

Why should Apple aid a competitor--especially when they don't have to? They offer a comparible and BETTER service, so why clutter up their code with Real compatibility?
This isn't "bad", and it's certainly not the "same" as MS. It's simply Apple setting its own course and following its own policy and strategy.

[jmincey]

If Apple sold only the iPod and didn't have iTMS, then it would be clear that it's in Apple's interest for its digital player to operate with as many online music services as possible (in order to remain competitive with other players). No argument there. It's only when you factor in iTMS that this becomes a question in some people's minds, and I contend even with iTMS that it's still in Apple's interest for the iPod to support many services.
For Apple there are two options here. One is for the iPod to support only a single online music store and the other is for the iPod to support multiple online music stores. Those who contend Apple will sell more iPods by taking the former approach over the latter have a hard case to make.

[cmflyer]

What format do Real song files come in? Can they be converted just like in iTunes?

[himbo]

In reply to:

---

This just shows you that APple is just as bad (or does many feel good) as Microsoft when it comes to orotecting their "Monopoly" or should we be nice & say "Insider BUsiness Advantage." I thought the Mac was about being different. Apple is just the same as MIcrosoft, just a little smaller.

---

Blah blah blah...there's a world of difference between protecting your own goods and engaging in ethically questionable business tactics to kill the competition. Is it "nice"? Of course not, but it's certainly not unfair of them to do this.

[sdf]

Some people's lack of logical thinking is just incredible.
Apple does not have a monopoly on music stores. That they have only a 70% share proves this. They do not have a monopoly on media players. They do not even have a "monopoly" on putting songs on the ipod; you can use MP3 or M4A.
What they have a "monopoly" on -- and a legal obligation to protect -- is their proprietary DRM.

[sdf]

In reply to:

---

If Apple sold only the iPod and didn't have iTMS, then it would be clear that it's in Apple's interest for its digital player to operate with as many online music services as possible (in order to remain competitive with other players).

---

Extend that a little further -- if Apple did not have iTMS, Fairplay would not even exist.
There are clearly ways of getting songs on to the iPod that do not require illegally cracking -- yes, that's what I said and what I meant -- Fairplay, Apple's proprietary DRM.

[adobephile]

How many of you skeptics made a "hard case" against the iPod itself when it first came out? "Too expensive!" many said. Hah!
I predicted that it would sell like hotcakes. It did, and surpassed even my zealous estimates.
SO WHAT! if it's a "hard case"! Bring it on. Bring on the challenge and all comers. I think Steve and Apple are up to it. They do well to continue to ignore "convention wisdom" such as yours.

[jmincey]

All things being equal, if given a choice between a digital player which supports only a single online music store versus one which supports multiple online music stores, which would you prefer? If you would prefer the former, and if you think the market would agree with you, I look forward to hearing you explain your reasons and make the case for this.
Or suppose Apple originally released iPod models which were indeed compliant with many online music stores. Would you be sending e-mail to Apple in which you plead with it to reduce the number of online store options for consumers down to one?
Would you also want to buy a CD player which supported CDs manufactured and sold only by a single party, thereby preventing you from going to the store or retail web site of your choice?
Finally, I imagine you are among those who find iTMS vastly superior to Real's offering. If this is the case, what does Apple have to fear from a little competition, especially if in the process it serves the interests of its customers who don't want to be locked into a single online store if they can help it?
If we choose iTMS over the others, it should be on merit and not because Apple has locked out all competition, don't ya think? Indeed, isn't that the very kind of thing we tend to tell Wintel and IE proponents?

[joepublic]

I've tried several music players over the years, from cassette walkmans through portable CD players, to the Rio and the iPod. I've upgraded my orginal 5gb and now have both a 15 and a 40Gb iPod. The iPod is the first music device that's changed (for the better) the way I listen to music.
Most of the music on my iPod is ripped from my own rather large CD collection - they're MP3's and I could play them on anything, i choose the iPod. I've used a number of the online music services, from Napster (the original incarnation) to Limewire and Aquisition, through the legitimate channels like iTMS, and I've chosen the iTMS, even though its only been recently that I could actually buy from it (I'm Canadian). I don't want multiple licencing arrangements to worry about, and I like that, at least so far, everything I've been looking for can be found fast, previewed, purchased and downloaded from the iTMS without any aggravation at all. Apple's invested heavily in making this the best possible solution, and I'd rather that Real not be able to benefit from Apple's iPods by selling 'compatible' music from the Real music store. Unsatisfied customers will blame Apple for them not being able to play their music, not Real for selling them a bill of goods. Apple will have to field support calls from iPod owners trying to figure out why their song won't play, and Real will have made the money on the sale.
If Apple openly locks them out, I say good for them, good for us. The more focused the revenue, the more likely Apple will continue to invest in the products and services, and the better they'll become. If Real wants to undercut Apple and steal away their business, that's not good for the market as a whole, let alone Apple. Real asked to deal, Apple said no, Real, like the petulant child needs to learn that no, means no!