“As promised, RealNetworks released a beta version of its Harmony software, which has created a firestorm because of the promise of iPod compatibility. The technology press has been filled with stories about Real’s claims and Apple’s sharp rebuke,” Gene Steinberg writes for The Mac News Owl.
“But none of the stories I’ve read, and I’m sure I haven’t read them all, mentions anything about the fact that only Windows users are getting the software. A Mac version doesn’t appear to be available, nor does the page describing Harmony explain any of this. But here are the nasty details you won’t discover unless you try it for yourself. Click on the Download link. On a Windows box, it’ll take you to the genuine download area where the promised software is available. On a Mac, you will only discover the same beta version of RealPlayer 10 that has been available since June, with no mention whatever of support for the iPod,” Steinberg writes.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Most probably, Apple will update iPod software causing Real’s Harmony technology to stop working with current and future iPods. Don’t buy a song from Real for your iPod unless you are prepared for it to become unplayable on your iPod sometime in the future.
Related MacDailyNews article:
RealNetwork’s CEO Glaser crashes Apple’s music party – July 30, 2004
lol oh matthew24, each article on MDN concerning REAL you put your same two cents in, lol! They say the key to humor is repetition! LOL!
ROTFLMAO!
ohhhhh my sides……….aaahhhhhhhhh
giggle
Who is right? Did Real steal Apple’s technology? Does the DMCA apply? Is this a case for legitimate reverse engineering for compatibility sake? These are all questions for the courts to decide.
But Real is going to lose for one simple reason, their software. It’s crap. The quality is lower for content, the interface in not intuitive, and the application is constantly nagging the end user to get more of their money. That’s why they are where they are now, and trying to hijack iPod users isn’t going to improve things. All Apple has to do is get into a virtual software arms race, where they change the iPod code slightly to break Harmony, and users will soon tire of the on again, off again, utility of their Real application.
And I wouldn’t blame Apple one bit. They are merely defending their hard earned market position and protecting their technology from leeches, like Real. No, this isn’t even close to M$’s behavior. Apple built a product that people want. They offer a service for that product, which adds even more value to their product. Consumers choose that product because it’s just better than the competing products. There is competition and Apple has done nothing to stifle their competitors in offering the same products and services they offer. As opposed to the M$ convicted, monopolistic, gun to the head of computer manufacturers, competitors, and users of “use my software or else” approach.
“Revenge of the Steve” coming soon to a courtroom near you!
—
http://homepage.mac.com/johnhood
“It’s called DRM circumvention. As in the case with DVD Jon vs Movie Studios on the deCSS crack that allows Computers to play DVD’s (the excuse was to make “back-up” copies.) DRM’s are there due to the agreements Apple and the Big 5 made with eachother. Bypassing that by cracking it against the terms and conditions is illegal.”
Whoa whoa whoa, time-out.
If you’re placing your faith in DMCA, your faith is misplaced. DMCA allows such things in order to support compatibility. It is perfectly legal under the DMCA to write software to convert formats from one to the other. Which is what Real has done, as I understand it.
Again, Real isn’t doing anything to iTMS music. All Real is doing is making a way to convert their Helix DRM information into FairPlay DRM information. I don’t know what sort of restrictions Helix supports versus FairPlay, and I am curious as to what little restriction nuggets might be lurking in FairPlay (maybe ‘time-limiting’ or ‘play-limiting’, so that you can only play a song for twenty-four hours or 16 times?)
In the case of deCSS, the big issue is that it could be used to bypass the country coding used on DVDs (this keeps Japanese DVDs from playing in American DVD players). So it did circumvent protection. Real’s work is not comparable in that it does not circumvent the protection used by Apple. Music purchased on iTMS will continue to have the same protections.
Frankly, Apple has no case. And there’s no way that Apple will win in the court of public opinion. So the only way that Apple can fight this is to employ Microsoftian tactics, such as explicitly breaking stuff, which will further hurt them in the court of public opinion.
Farang’s request to Matthew24, “Would you care to explain why Apple is unethical.”
Matthew24’s response, “Last post: I am no longer going to dispute with some rigid narrow minded Apple freaks.”
Translation – Matthew24 just admitted that he cannot substantiate his earlier comment on Apple’s ethics.
Real broke the law and it’s only a matter of time that Apple will shut them down. First with an iPod firmware update and then with a restraining order on there supposed licensing deal for software that won’t work anyway. Reverse engineering is frowned upon in many companies and why would I want to use a second rate store that charges me a fee per month to use it anyway? So I can get streamed music which I can get anyway without paying? Oh what a deal, NOT!
Matthew24 is so funny ! I hope he comes back more often.
Wow, quite the touchy subject. Lemme reiterate the obvious (for those who are blinded by Real’s horrible software interface). Microsoft was smart. They made their own operating system based off of Apple back in the day. It wasn’t made to run on their computers or to run Apple’s programs. It only ran their own programs. Apple had no official stance on the case since it was a reinvention but copied the graphical interface (which was stolen from Xeros).
Compare that scenario to Real. Real took an iPod. It ripped it apart into pieces and made their software work on the iPod. It is not a matter of making their own software for their own or other company’s mp3 players based from Apple’s work. It’s like Microsoft porting Windows to (attempt to) function on an Apple machine. That’s too harsh. Apple has exclusive technology for a bloody reason. They get screwed over and over by the third-party “innovative” / conniving companies. Live in the past to see into the future.
Real is a lame company made by a loner and his buddy years back to bring radio the internet. There are better options now. Get lost already.
Ace:
“Apple had no official stance on the case since it was a reinvention but copied the graphical interface (which was stolen from Xeros).”
Be careful about spreading the FUD about Apple “stealing” it’s OS from Xerox’s PARC. Apple *paid* to go to that reserch center, and it used ideas it got there to come up with it’s *own* GUI. In both the Lisa and the Mac projects. Xerox was not working on creating a GUI that it was bringing to market, it was merely a lab where they came up with ideas. If Apple had not created the Lisa/Mac, it’s likely that the PARC ideas never would have seen the light of day.
What MS did was take Apple’s ideas which were actual real marketplace ideas and rip them off wholesale. Illegally. They only got away with it because Apple, unfortuneately got a judge who was too blind and stupid to see what MS had done was wrong. They even took lines of code wholesale from the Mac OS. Keep in mind that Apple was working with MS on the Office programs, so MS had access to specific lines of code. The two situations are not comparible at all.
Matthew24 is a girlie-man!
Ace stated “Apple had no official stance on the case since it was a reinvention but copied the graphical interface (which was stolen from Xeros).”
Wrong! Apple may have copied ideas from Xerox, which the latter invited them to do, but they did not steal or extort technology from Xerox as Microtheft Inc. has done from Apple. Get your facts straight. Apple actually thanked Xerox for their generosity by giving them a block of Apple stock, which repaid Xerox handsomely.