“Apple Computer has quietly updated its iPod software so that songs purchased from RealNetworks’ online music store will no longer play on some of the Mac maker’s popular MP3 players,” John Borland reports for CNET News. “The move could render tunes purchased by many iPod owners unplayable on their music players. For the last four months, RealNetworks has marketed its music store as the only Apple rival compatible with the iPod, following the company’s discovery of a way to let its customers play their downloaded tunes on Apple’s MP3 player.”
MacDailyNews Take: Come now, let’s get “real.” How many iPod owners were really running off to buy songs from RealNetworks?
Borland reports, “Apple criticized RealNetworks’ workaround, dubbed Harmony, as the ‘tactics…of a hacker,’ and warned in July that RealNetworks-purchased songs would likely ‘cease to work with current and future iPods.’ Apple offered no further statement Tuesday, but confirmed that the software released with its Photo iPod will not play music purchased from RealNetworks’ music store.”
“The changes Apple made were to the iPod’s ‘firmware,’ which is the low-level software that powers hardware such as MP3 players…” Borland reports. “The notes that accompanied the release mentioned several enhancements, but did not comment on Harmony. It was not immediately clear whether iPods older than the Photo edition had as a result also been rendered incompatible with RealNetworks’ technology.”
Full article here.
In November, RealNetworks was among the “big winners” at the first annual Billboard Digital Entertainment Awards. RealNetworks’ Rhapsody won Best Downloadable or Subscription Music Service, and the company’s Harmony service won Digital Music Innovation of the Year. No one outside Billboard has really been able to figure out why. More info here.
MacDailyNews Take: Break out the Krispy Kremes! We only wish Apple had done this sooner. It’s RealNetwork’s responsibility to care for their customers. If they sold these so-called “Harmony” files as “iPod-compatible” and they now don’t work on iPods, Real has a problem. It is not Apple’s responsibility to make sure Rob Glaser’s hack works.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
RealNetworks ‘Harmony’ stops working on iPods but nobody notices for a month and a half – December 15, 2004
Bono-Glaser photo caption contest now open – October 25, 2004
Real’s CEO Glaser: ‘Harmony’ hack legal, Mac lovers are very sensitive to Apple criticism, and more – September 14, 2004
Analyst: Rob Glaser’s ill-advised war against Apple ‘is going to bite RealNetworks on the ass’ – August 30, 2004
Rob Glaser interviewed about achieving harmony with Steve Jobs – August 17, 2004
RealNetwork’s CEO Glaser crashes Apple’s music party – July 30, 2004
Real CEO Glaser: Steve Jobs’ comments on Real ‘not succeeding’ are ‘ridiculously humorous’ – April 29, 2004
NY Times: Real CEO Glaser was close to having ‘iPod’ before Apple, but let it ‘slip through his fingers – April 24, 2004
Real’s CEO Glaser: Apple’s iPod/iTunes combo ‘threatens to turn off consumers’ – April 20, 2004
Jobs to Glaser: go pound sand – April 16, 2004
Real CEO Glaser begs Apple to make iPod play nice with other music services – March 24, 2004
g$
On the money about compressed musing formats and audio quality. One reason I won’t buy downloadable music – none of it has the quality of source (even if the source is of dubious quality).
Seems sheepish that a company limits your choices & stifles competition, yet gets unlimited praise for it.
What product that you own works with everything? Apple supports plenty of formats. This is business grow up. Who are you talking about MS? Who’s stifling competition? There are plent of choices out there…Napster, MS, Real, Creative, Dell, Sony, Virgin, Etc., etc., etc. Make your choice. Since you seem to think the other companies somehow offer more why should you give a shit what Apple even has to offer. Move on & stop whining. Most people don’t even buy songs online. They transfer there songs from CDs. Microsoft tactics, hardly.
Zupchuck,
Using the software analogy would be more like you purchasing something with a minimum system requirement double that of your
system and then complaining when it stops working with a system update. Apple never stated in any of their ads or in their product packaging or literature that the iPod was compatible with any of Reals downloads. It is clearly stated what file formats work with the iPod, anything else is at your own risk. If you don’t like the requirements shop elsewhere but don’t complain when the product you bought from the snake oil salesman works for awhile and then stops.
g$ and zupchuck, I am not an audiophile, but I do have a desire to legally download higher quality recordings. Are there any sites out there that don’t compress their music, or do a better job? I do prefer to download over purchasing CDs, because I don’t like to pay the album price for one good song.
I guess if there was a better quality download site, Apple would not allow it to work with my iPod either. Now, that seems like a real problem.
Hey Audiophile… Maybe Apple will offer a choice of compression quality next year. Sounds like a good idea to me.
When the other manufacturers start making comparable products to the iPod, the focus should shift to music quality. What Real and others should be working on is better sound quality. It’s about the music stupid. This could be Apple’s Achilles heel.
Re: Andy C and Peter J
I think Apple taking action without a CONCURRENT explanation just isn’t honest.
I call bullshit. Apple fixed a loophole in their device which allowed a hack to break into it. Apple does not need to explain every fix to their hardware or software in detail. Had they not explained at the time of Real’s announcement that they planned to fix the problem you may have a small point, but only if they had remained silent.
They did not.
And you have no point.
And, no, two wrongs don’t make a right.
Real, clearly did something wrong. While they claimed they were acting in the interest of “consumer choice” they really weren’t. You already had the choice not to buy an iPod and to buy a device that worked with Real’s store. When Apple never claimed that their device would work with an alternate store, particularly by the result of some “hack” then fixes the problem later, there’s nothing that is wrong.
I’m not the biggest fan of DRMs, but to the extent that we do have them, Apple has to enforce them. To the extent that their device is to remain simple and elegant, and “just work” they need to have their closed, fixed, “proprietary” way of making it work. That is how they make sure they can keep the iPod what it is. You are welcome to use the iPod in a fashion that is different from Apple’s wishes, and violates their terms of use, but you then have no right to expect any support from Apple in what you chose to do. This includes updates to the iPod, and iTunes.
Aryugaetu
I fail to see any monopoly that Apple has on the music industry. You can still buy ANY CD in ANY music store and play it on ANY player on any computer.
This only applies to the US. In much of the rest of the world, more and more so-called “CD” content is in fact copy protected. These imposter CDs attempt to limit consumer choice much in the same similar fashion to DRMed online digital content.
zupchuck
What’s so great about a company that just voided your legally acquired music that paid for because it didn’t arrive with their blessing? Why is that an “irrational nonsensical inane opinion”?
I take back and apologize for some of the personal nature of my post regarding you. I still strongly disagree with you and I think your viewpoint is fundamentally wrong, but I should not have been an ass about how I responded to you.
That said, let me respond to your post:
1. Apple voided nothing. They made it clear back at the time of Real’s announcement that their hack was not supported by Apple and at that time they made it clear it might be undone by further iPod updates. At that point, it was buyer beware, you’ve already been warned. While I think my tone was overly harsh, I still think you placing the blame on Apple here is irrational and nonsensical.
a software update which rendered my software useless WITHOUT warning during the install
2. Most Mac software is made by 3rd party developers. Apple has a conference every year to support them called the WWDC in June. Apple has taken some ideas from 3rd party developers and incorporated them into the operating system, but they haven’t arbitrarily broken software as you describe.
Apple does not support 3rd party software or hacks on the iPod, and does not recommend them. They offer pretty generous support on their product, I can take a broken iPod into an Apple store for a new one in the first year of purchase and usually get a replacement no questions asked. As I already stated, Apple had already made the warning at the time of Real’s announcement. No need to say what specific update they fix the problem in. If you ignored Apple’s warning, you’re on your own.
But a customer who downloads an update to essentially punish Real Networks is hardly consumer friendly.
3. Here is where we disagree again. Apple is being consumer friendly by locking out hacks and unsupported 3rd party stuff. Allowing their product to be watered down by unsupported hacks means they have to support all the havoc that could cause. You seem to think that Apple should be responsible for supporting any and all actions the consumer makes with the iPod.
I don’t.
If you want Apple’s help with your product, and their support, don’t ignore what they say about not hacking and not adding things to your iPod that they don’t support. Especially if they say they may change the product in the future to not work with it, as in the case of Real’s “harmony.”
You nonsense about diesel in gas cars and ” it’s time for MS to take it’s rightful place dominating the music market” is the only troll. People lighten up a bit. Apple is a great company, but everything they do doesn’t smell of roses.
4. My comparison was actually rather dead on. Unsupported gasoline, unsupported hack files. You haven’t explained why my analogy was flawed, so it stands.
I agree that I was pretty harsh, but yours was just so wrong.. again that’s my opinion. I was not a troll, I expressed what I truly felt, as apparently did you. You’re just wrong!
I’m very objective about Apple and do criticize them. I just feel this is an inappropriate place to find fault with them. What Real did was wrong, morally, and ethically, and I do not believe it enhanced consumer choice.
Most folks want a instant answer. Even for major purchases.
If they feel pressured into researching anything for more than 20-30 seconds, then they USUALLY will settle on ‘getting sold’ a product that was ‘marketed’ just for them.
I’m quite irritating to most ‘sales’people. They NEVER ‘sell me’ anything. I always buy.
What I think is the funniest thing about this is that the iPod updater has been out for, what, a month? And it took this long for it to come out that anyone who has bought music from Real to complain.
That guy must be pissed.
Oops…
Should read:
And it took this long for anyone who has bought music from Real to complain.
Gary
And it took this long for anyone who has bought music from Real to complain.
I only speak for myself, but I got it the first time Gary, and it was funny. I think most posters on here are smart enough to know what you meant.
Reset your iPod, intall the software that came with it and it all be alright. Also you could use Myth and be done with all the DRM nonsence. You have the software…battle
Only the iPod photo is affected by this. The standard iPod, mini and iPod U2 are not affected.
This cnet article has been much ado about nothing. iPod photo is different than the regular iPod and probably needed tweaks to existing firmware or maybe even new firmware. There is nothing sinister about what happened between Real and the iPod. If Apple really wanted to squash Real out of the iPod, they would have released an iPod updater that is for ALL models. They haven’t done such a thing in almost six months.
Personally, I think Apple wants to battle Real in the marketplace. It’ll save time and money to prove that no one wants to use their service and also prevents Apple from potentially getting into legal trouble later on (due to ‘unfair competition’).
>>> Tried posting a reply from work (using Netscape) and
>>> MDN’s Magic Word thing is broken. I typed in the
>>> exact word and it would not work.
>>> Tried posting a reply from work (using Netscape) and
>>> MDN’s Magic Word thing is broken. I typed in the
>>> exact word and it would not work.
twilightmoon,
What’s erroneous about the diesel/gas analogy for cars is that diesel isn’t sold or marketed for gas automobiles. Real Networks tunes were sold and marketed for iPods. And, it did not harm the iPod (only seemingly expanding the range of product a consumer can succesffully include on their iPod), only Apple’s business in selling music from iTMS.
Why is the customer being held hostage in this battle between Real and Apple? That is my beef, really. Apple could render Real’s software ineffective, but do so with iPod customer approval (during a proper install) and alter the DRM of the Real music to play on the “normalized” iPod. The music was bought legally. Apple can then fight Real on legal and moral grounds because the consumer was protected.
Apple only paid attention because it threatened their bottom line and/or relationship with the record companies. Not because it threatened the customer. Real Networks is just desperate to survive.
Bottom line, if I bought music from Real, legally, and another company rendereed it useless, I either want my music restored or paid for.
Re: Bobby and CD sound quality
I am by no means an expert here, but having spent my fair share of time in the frequency domain, I have to question your sources. While true that LP’s are a faithful reproduction of the original waveform, a digital reproduction of that waveform can be done if we sample it at twice the highest fequency (Nyquist). The sampling rate of CD is 44kHz, the frequency range of a concert piano, flute, clarinet, violin and the like are less than 17kHz. Clearly then, we can faithfully reproduce those sounds, provided we have high quality equipment – stuff with good comb filters, etc. to interpolate the sound. I get annoyed when people say CD’s suck when they are comparing a $10,000 record player to a $50 portable CD player. Yeah, it’s all about the music, but it’s also just physics.
zupchuck
What’s erroneous about the diesel/gas analogy for cars is that diesel isn’t sold or marketed for gas automobiles. Real Networks tunes were sold and marketed for iPods. And, it did not harm the iPod (only seemingly expanding the range of product a consumer can succesffully include on their iPod), only Apple’s business in selling music from iTMS.<i>
Okay… let me stop you right there.
Real sold it’s tunes and marketed them for iPods. <i>Not Apple. So if they don’t work, take it up with Real, not Apple. The diesel gas analogy would be like if a gas station sold you gas that they told you would work with your car, but it didn’t. You may have a case against the gas station, but not your car manufacturer.
I already explained why Real hacking into the iPod without Apple’s blessing harmed the iPod. You chose to ignore my point entirely, which is fine. But don’t keep saying that it did not harm the iPod.
You bought the iPod, you can do anything you want with it. But if you do something against Apple’s blessing, then don’t expect their support if something goes wrong. This includes downloading updates.
Why is the customer being held hostage in this battle between Real and Apple?
Held hostage? Please. Enough of the ridiculous hysterics. This hyperbole is why I mocked you in my first post. C’mon.
The music was bought legally. Apple can then fight Real on legal and moral grounds because the consumer was protected.
Bought legally, yes. But for what purpose? If it was to put onto an iPod, only Real said it was okay. Not Apple. If you want Apple’s help with your iPod, don’t be loading up on hacks and things that they don’t recommend or specify in it’s packaging. If you feel you only need Real’s blessing to modify your Apple iPod, then get support from Real if something goes wrong.
Apple only paid attention because it threatened their bottom line and/or relationship with the record companies. Not because it threatened the customer. Real Networks is just desperate to survive.
Threatened their bottom line, yes. But not for the reason you seem to think. It threatened Apple’s bottom line precisely because it did threaten their customers, by making their product harder to use or support. Apple worked hard to make the iPod and iTunes work together to make their product the best it can be. The greatest selling point of the iPod is it just works. This point seems lost on you.
Allowing unsupported third parties to come in and alter and change the iPod dilutes the value of Apple’s product. This also seems to be lost on you.
Again, if you want to do all this hacking and adding unrecommended software and customize your iPod, be my guest. Just don’t expect help from Apple. Heck, disassemble your iPod and make a mobile out of it, just don’t cry to me when you take it to the Apple store and they won’t replace it your iPod pieces with a new one for some reason.
I agree with you about Real though.
Bottom line, if I bought music from Real, legally, and another company rendereed it useless
Again, you’re being disingenuous here. Apple did not render your music useless, unless you only bought it to work with your iPod. If you did that, then you’re a fool. Apple told you not to, warned you that they might not allow it to work after future firmware updates (if you were paying attention you’d know this). Apple provides a simple and elegant solution for buying songs online, iTMS, and there are CDs, and plenty of MP3s floating around out there.
I either want my music restored or paid for.
Then ask Real.
BTW, did you notice Gary’s post:
What I think is the funniest thing about this is that the iPod updater has been out for, what, a month? And it took this long for anyone who has bought music from Real to complain.
That guy must be pissed.
I think that says it all right there.
My point was this. As you mentioned, Apple made an outcry at the time Real unveiled Harmony. However, it has not documented its disapproval of this technology (at least not that I can find, and I’d be quiet if someone could point out where Apple has its complaint documented on its website). As a matter of fact, it has done/said nothing about this other than to break the technology. So, any recent iPod customer, who has not received any warning from Apple and can not find any mention by Apple of a problem, all of sudden has a device that doesn’t play content that they had every reasonable expectation would work. Again, I don’t think Apple is being honest.
Zupchuck,
In following this discussion, it seems that there are two separate but important issues involved. One has to do with how Apple should deal with Real in this instance, and the other is how Apple should deal with online music stores in general.
Personally, I think it would be nice if Apple cooperated with other music stores to give the consumer a wider array of choices, and I don’t think Twilight is necessarily arguing this point. The key is that the two businesses would need to FULLY cooperate with each other to provide the BEST user experience. Apple shouldn’t and won’t settle for a subpar experience, and that is why it is wise for Apple not to allow Real (or any company) to create software that circumvents the control that Apple has put in place for the iPod. I think Twilight is merely saying that any company that doesn’t negotiate an agreement with Apple is ultimately causing more harm than good to the consumer and to Apple. And that is exactly what Real has done.
If Real has something to offer Apple and can come to some mutually beneficial agreement, then that will benefit everyone. And Apple has shown that it is willing to make deals with other companies, as long everyone beneifts. If there is any truth to the rumors a while back about Apple approaching Sony for a possible deal, then Apple is more than willing to provide the user options, as long as the commitment to excellence is not compromised.
Only time will tell how Apple will handle this in the future, but with the case of Real, Apple is right on.
twilightmoon,
We certainly disagree. Your premise is that the iPod must not be altered because it dilutes or otherwise changes the value of the iPod – to Apple. If a consumer wishes to alter their iPod, great. And if it works, great. If my hysterics and hyperbole are so out of whack to be mocked, and if Gary’s post about the dearth of Harmony is even remotely accurate – why did Apple react so strongly? The only customer(s) “threatened” are the ones who made a decision to broaden their choice for shopping for music from more than just iTMS.
By locking a customer into an DRM, by definition you’ve limited their choice.
The way folks are supporting Apple’s stance with the MP3 player market is the antithesis of how they treat M$ with the PC OS market. We chastise M$ on their lack of innovation and restrictions, yet praise Apple for the same (restrictions) in the music market. The iPod is a wonderfully integrated device. But if I choose to buy another MP3 player with more or better features, I’m locked out of iTMS (whether or not I want to use iTunes). If I want to use iTMS, I’m locked into iPod.
Granted if I choose an OS, I’m locked into a hardware platform, but I can still use or edit standards-based files on either. DRM locks you in and Apple conveniently uses that shield. Once that shield is broken, then the value of the iPod (and even more, iTMS) is diluted for Apple, not the consumer.
Real attempted to render the shield useless and got spanked for it. Again, the consumer was held hostage for trying to broaden their choice. Apple has learned from being on the short end of the stick, and is desperate to hold onto its lead position. It makes a great product, far better than M$. The irony of Apple’s behavior in the music industry vs. the OS industry isn’t lost on me.
[it did not harm the iPod]
Yes, actually it did. Apple provides software -that ‘they’ deem fit- to interoperate with the iPod. In order to use the ‘Harmony’ tunes, the iPod owner must abandon iTunes software in favor of Real’s software, and control ALL of the music on the iPod with said software. As has been pointed – several times – this is not recommended.
[The music was bought legally]
If you legally bought 8-track tapes from one music distributor, would you demand that they be playable on another manufacturers equipment? Think about your answer first, and consider this: If BrandR invents the turntable, is it up to BrandR to insure that the vinyl platters that ‘others’ make play on their equipment – or vice versa?
–
If the BrandR turntable is the ‘favored’ equipment, then shouldn’t the media format that others want to sell their media on, be compatible with the BrandR turntable?
If the ‘PC’ is the ‘favored’ equipment, then shouldn’t the media format that others want to sell their media on, be compatible with the ‘PC’?
If the Microsoft turntable is the ‘favored’ equipment, then shouldn’t the media format that others want to sell their media on, be compatible with the Microsoft turntable?
After reading the last three paragraphs, you’d logically conclude that Apple would earn the exact same ‘rights’ to ‘control’ its design. However, I continue to be amazinged by the hypocritical notion that Apple’s equipment can never garner the same respect for IP.
One more thing
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”tongue wink” style=”border:0;” />
If you find yourself stranded at the edge of a highway because YOU ‘chose’ to use a car part from Pep Boys instead of the ‘recommended Ford part, will you be issuing your complaint to Ford or Pep Boys…or the manufacture of the part?
And yet one more thing.
Amazingly, there’s no such word as ‘amazinged’. JFYI.