“You could tell it was a bizarre feud by the statement Apple issued, one strangely at odds with the Palo Alto Zen-chic the company normally projects. ‘We are stunned that RealNetworks has adopted the tactics and ethics of a hacker to break into the iPod, and we are investigating the implications of their actions under the DMCA [Digital Millennium Copyright Act] and other laws.’ What vile thing had RealNetworks done? They had developed a program called Harmony that would allow iPod owners to buy songs from Real
32 Comments
Reader Feedback
Apple Watch X likely to feature a major redesign
A next-generation Apple Watch, suspected to be the long-rumored Apple Watch X (ten) will use a new resin coated copper (RCC) motherboard…
Apple co-founder Steve Jobs spent ‘hour after hour’ on product design
Steve Jobs dedicated “hour after hour” to the minutiae of product design at Apple, driven by a belief of God being in the details,…
Apple Vision Pro killer app: Sports and concerts, totally immersive
So far, the killer apps for the Apple Vision Pro , besides watching movies and TV series, appear to be sports and concerts…
Apple TV+ debuts trailer for ‘The Big Cigar,’ new limited series starring André Holland as Black Panther leader Huey P. Newton
Apple TV+ on Wednesday revealed the trailer for “The Big Cigar,” the upcoming limited series led by André Holland, who stars alongside…
Apple’s forthcoming M4 Mac Studio Sounds like an absolute beast
Apple’s current Mac Studio delivers next-generation speed, but the next-gen M4-powered Mac Studio promises to deliver breathtaking power…
Apple rightly called it hacking because Real broke into the encryption (or protection) system. It’s the same activity that Johanssen just did with AirTunes encryption. Even if you don’t remove it, you broke into it.
you know, the thing that nobody brings up is the fact that while real is doing this, it’s only doing this for the windows side. is there any offering to their music store for mac users? no. that in and of itself shows that they know they can’t compete with the combination of the itms and ipod.
I feel that the best analogy for iPod and iTunes is not the Macintosh and Mac OS but to video games.
If you buy a Playstation 2, you can only use Playstation 2 games with it. You can’t use Xbox games or gamecube games or Dreamcast games.
For a lot of games, this isn’t a problem. Madden is available for a lot of platforms, so is Grand theft Auto.
For music, as MDN points out, the process of “porting” from one platform to the other is ridiculously easy.
In video games, this would be an environment like if Halo were ported to all platforms and Mario were ported to all platforms.
Furthermore, Sony makes money from the licensing of Playstation games, Microsoft from Xbox games, and Nintendo from gamecube games.
I believe what would happen to video games is that gamers would choose the platform based on which system is better (Stability, Power, Ease of use).
Let’s assume Xbox starts winning the platform war with 70% of games and over 50% of systems because it’s more powerful than the others and all the games one could want are readily available (ridiculously easy porting). Also, since Microsoft licenses the games, they can make sure that Halo 2 for Xbox won’t crash the Xbox.
So, Sony now has bad market share and comes up with “Harmony” so that Playstation licensed games can work on Xbox.
In this scenario, if Microsoft blocks Sony’s “Harmony” technology (for stability and business reasons), can ANYONE think of a good reason why Xbox would go down to 5% marketshare?!?!?!
(The Mac -> iPod analogy makes NO SENSE!)
I agree that the Mac/iPod analogy makes no sense.
But I’d like to look at this from another angle. When asked why the iPod couldn’t play copy-protected music from other stores, Apple always said that they preferred not to take their development resources from developing their own products.
Fair enough. But now when Real uses their own development resources to create compatibility, Apple screams bloody murder. Why ? None of Apple’s resources were distracted from creating their own products. Guess that wasn’t the real reason after all.
Apple was created by people who love computers and music, and Harmony is a clever computer trick that lets iPods play more music. I think the 1976 Jobs, Wozniak, etc would have applauded it.
Now don’t get me wrong. No one in 2004 can blame Apple for acting like a stockholder driven corporation. Let’s just be honest that that’s what’s going on here.
I just don’t like real’s attitude about this whole thing, or the free ride that they want to get on the ipod’s coattails. they’ve been struggling for God knows how long, and this seems like a last ditch effort to stay afloat.
One more point, what would real say if apple hacked real player to make quicktime play real video and audio? hmmmmm?? (I think they should do that, I hate real player)
And how long has this hack been out? I’m wondering what Apple is planning to do….I’d figure they would put out an iPod update by now.
Long live Bleep.com! Perfect quality electronica MP3s with no protection. Play on any system that plays MP3s (currently everybody except Sony, who should be beaten with a memory stick).
The iPod/video game analogy is dead on. Well said.
I think it’s funny how this article was written by a finance journalist and he can’t seem to understand why Apple would want to protect their business. Isn’t he supposed to understand this stuff?
Real is like the annoying fat kid who picks his nose and eats it, who insists on hanging out with the neighborhood kids even though they can’t stand him. Come to think of it, that’s a pretty good physical description of Glaser too!
either way this ia bad press for Apple and is the kind of press that makes people afraid of buying an iPod (and then they bu a Dell DJ). That’s a shame. Apple shouldn’t have reacted like such a baby and tried to keep thisone onder the covers more.
I don’t think this will affect iPod sales. Only us geeks know or care about this. Regular people have no idea, and in the WinDOS world they go for what’s easiest, which is the iPod-ITMS experience by far.
Most people don;t care about the apple/real issue when buying an iPod. They just want their experience to be great. This issue will stop maybe a handful of people in the world from buying an iPod. And they will choose an inferior product because of this.
Only geeks who love to rip Apple hate what Apple is doing here. And geeks are a tiny protion of the buying public. Remember how much they hated the iPod when it came out? They have no clue.
As for Real, if Apple wanted to license to Real, they would have. If they do not, that is their choice, right or wrong. And there is nothing keeping Apple from licensing to Real later if they find they are losing market share. But the choice is up to APPLE! Not Real.
One of the benefits of using Macs and the iPod is that, for the most part, everything just works. From software to hardware, it just works. Now with Real getting involved, if things begin to NOT work, Apple will be blamed and get bad press, maybe even have to replace defective iPods, if Real screws up. Does Apple want to be like Microsoft and have to spend billions keeping everything seemless, just because of Real? Heck no. that is why Apple, for now, wants a closed shop. and its their choice, not Reals.
How will the labels react if the DRM is compromised? What if iTunes and whatever Real’s store is called are closed due to the labels losing faith in online distribution? That is a real possibility..
Apple did this all wrong from the start. It’s been awknologed many times that the $$ is in the hardware, not the online stores. Apple should’ve licensed FairPlay to Real and anyone else who came along with visions of on-line music sales.
However, most all of them would’ve failed, and Apple would still be on top with even better press.
Remember, the whole iTMS, iTunes, iPod bundle? If Real was selling AAC/Fairplay tracks, the’d be outside that. extra steps for the consumer = loss of consumer interest. I manage my iPod through my iTunes, so why not just buy my music there, also? Why would I want to open other programs (web browser), track down other companies (Real), most of which make it difficult to buy a track? No, most consumers would stick with iTMS, Apple would’ve gotten good press, and Real would be looking for some other excuse for their poor bottom line…
The last paragraph of the article makes me really mad. I’m really tired of hearing that myth that “20 years ago if Apple opened up the Mac…” and that Boyle says it in a so arrogant way that it make me want to slap him in the face (not in the real world though, I don’t wan’t to get at less than 100 feet of the guy).
Maybe we should mail him multiple copies of John Gruber’s fine article at http://daringfireball.net/2004/08/parlay which pretty much destroy this myth in several ways.
While I don’t like the way Real did what they did, I don’t like the way digital music is set up right now. Imagine going into a CD store and purchasing a CD only to get home and find it didn’t play on your home stereo. That would never fly.
Screw the proprietary control of drm technologies. Let your service be successful because the ease of use, selection, features, and quality of your product (and at 128kb, Apple’s quality is lacking). Other than the quality issue, Apple wins all the other battle hands down.
Zippy:
I already did that, and suggested that he read “Broken Windows” and “So Witty” in John’s Archives section while he is having his paradigm shifted. I also pointed out the difference between different music formats and different versions of programs for different processors/operating systems.
A few more wouldn’t hurt, though!
Mike
If you buy a Playstation 2, you can only use Playstation 2 games with it. You can’t use Xbox games or gamecube games or Dreamcast games.
You also can’t use a Tape in a DVD player. Different physical formats. You can’t use Office:mac for windows either. But if the software manufacturer chooses to create a version for that system, so be it.
For a lot of games, this isn’t a problem. Madden is available for a lot of platforms, so is Grand theft Auto.
yes, “GAME” developers decide who they want to develop/port games to. They choose to make their product available to all game systems for better market share.
For music, as MDN points out, the process of “porting” from one platform to the other is ridiculously easy.
MDN says it will play in “any” format the developer chooses, but really, it only plays ONE “DRM” format. So as long as any means any physical media purchased and then converted… then yes.
In video games, this would be an environment like if Halo were ported to all platforms and Mario were ported to all platforms.
except those are owned by microsoft and nintendo respectively. Apple does not have a music label, therefore, a bad analogy.
When it comes to games, it’s the manufacturer-owned software that the hardware developer owns that draw you to a particular system… much like it’s OSX that draws us to the mac hardware platform.
Let’s assume…
hmmm…
Your analogy would work if Apple had Apple music. They’re playing OTHER PEOPLE’S music.
WHY can’t anyone else provide downloaded music. They’re not controlling the product. They’re controlling the distribution. It would be like if they didn’t allow you to buy adobe, microsoft office, or corel software online, except on their “apple online software store.”
Unless you bought the physical box from Best Buy.
It’s just like I put any shop’s coffee in my starbucks coffee cup (not just the burnt coffee that my coffee makes
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />).
What if I want to sell my new song on my personal website, but want it to be DRM and playable on a variety of players? Why can’t i encode it in any DRM i want? I’m selling music (the product) not an ideology.
Isn’t it really all about the music?
If Apple had opened up the software, we really don’t know WHAT would’ve happened. Both Daring Fireball and Boyle are speculating… or is it postulating?
Anyone see Back to the Future? Don’t mess with history.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Who wants to use the REAL piece of crap anyway? REAL’s library doesn’t offer anything that iTunes doesn’t have (except a month subscription option). Even if the songs were 10 to 20 cents cheaper, it’s not worth the friggin’ around to get them to work on the iPod. It seems that these ANALysts miss the fact that the iPod is a cool MP3 player but, the what makes it all work (with very minimal effort) is iTunes.
iNewt…
There will always be something the iTMS doesn’t have.
Let the consumer decide. That’s what capitalism is based on.
For example, communism is based on lack of choice that everyone should get the same thing, no matter what they think… and although altruistic in concept and is ideal… doesn’t work because you give too much power… to a human… among other reason.
The parallel isn’t to communism mind you… but in essence, the principle that a lack of choice isn’t good stands as it gives too much power to one party, even if, currently, it’s the best solution.
Surely someone who buys a Mercedes or BMW will not seek Honda or Nissan for annual/periodic maintenance. Should we blame Luxury car manufacturers for practicing monopoly and will those who offer cheaper Mercedes replacement parts practice a noble work that will be profitable in anyway?
This article is interesting but the author contradict himself as I’m sure he wouldn’t like seeing another site rather than FT.COM publishing the same article on his behalf… or will he be in favor of letting writers use his ideas without consulting him before?
Surely capitalism has big flaws, but shouldn�t he know the facts before almost accusing Apple of practicing a monopoly when it comes to iPod and iTunes. At least Apple offers a complete product. Does Real offer a consistent substitute to what Apple has? The answer is NO!
Peace
Everyone keeps talking about Apple vs. Microsoft. Isn’t this comparison flawed? Microsoft doesn’t make computers. They make software. Apple was competing with computer manufacturers. Every system had there own OS. The IBM PC platform did not exist until after IBM released it. Microsoft’s only customer for DOS was IBM. It wasn’t until Compaq REVERSE ENGINEERED the IBM PC ROM did the “IBM PC and Compatibles” platform exist. I don’t know why IBM didn’t try shut down the clones. But I do know why Microsoft licensed DOS. DOS is software. They sell software.
For example, Microsoftism is based on lack of choice.
Everyone should get the same thing, no matter what they think.
And although altruistic in concept and is ideal… doesn’t work because you give too much power… to one ‘human’.
I’m not saying I’m against choice. Choice is a good thing, and a big choice a lot of people are making is the iPod.
What I’m saying is, currently, nobody has anything close to the iPod/iTune/iTMS COMBINATION, with the emphasis on COMBINATION. The iPod is successful because of the total package. For now, I believe Apple wants as many people to experience the “APPLE Way”. And remember this big choice is currenlty only available for PeeCee users.
With all that said, a little friendly competition is a good thing for everyone, too bad there isn’t any yet.
The author’s credentials:
“James Boyle is William Neal Reynolds Professor of Law at Duke Law School, a board member of Creative Commons and the co-founder of the Center for the Study of the Public Domain”
Read the article before you babble on this board (including MDN webmasters). It’s a great article!
MDN wrote “To draw an analogy between the Mac and the iPod highlights the writer’s ignorance of this fact.”
Please read the article over again; you miss the point entirely.
A quick summation for the uninclined:
Mr. Boyle – Professor of Law at Duke Law School – showed how the DMCA and modern copyright protections are being exploited to create monopolies in the digital world.
Are you saying it’s okay for Apple to be a monopolist?
The author’s credentials:
“James Boyle is William Neal Reynolds Professor of Law at Duke Law School, a board member of Creative Commons and the co-founder of the Center for the Study of the Public Domain”
Read the article before you babble on this board (including MDN webmasters). It’s a great article!
MDN wrote “To draw an analogy between the Mac and the iPod highlights the writer’s ignorance of this fact.”
Please read the article over again; you miss the point entirely.
A quick summation for the uninclined:
Mr. Boyle – Professor of Law at Duke Law School – showed how the DMCA and modern copyright protections are being exploited to create monopolies in the digital world.
Are you saying it’s okay for Apple to be a monopolist?