“The fact that Apple is now actively changing the product to block Real Networks who did the work to support the iPod, changes things quite a bit. Apple crossed the line. I support them using the iPod’s amazing success to bolster iTunes sales. I don’t think they should be forced to help others as long as that is where the strategy stopped. I can not support them actively blocking others from trying to offer competitive alternatives to iTunes on the iPod,” AudioGoGo.com writes.
“This is exactly like the accusations that Microsoft tried to break DR-DOS or other products from working with Windows. Because Apple has 90% of the HD player market, this action effectively uses the iPod to lock Real Networks out of selling and competing in that market,” AudioGoGo.com writes.
“To take this metaphor outside the computer world. Imagine 90% of all passenger cars were Fords. I don’t think Ford should have to offer third-party stereos, or help makers of third-party stereos design them to work. The moment Ford prevents the owner from choosing one of those stereos, by changing the car’s wiring, that is wrong,” AudioGoGo.com writes. “For this reason, I would support Real Networks if they sue Apple over this change of the iPod. I prefer competition to happen in the market place, not the courtroom. However, in my opinion this alteration of the iPod specifically to block a competitor, might justify legal action. No one is forcing iPod owners to switch from iTunes, no one should prevent them from choosing an alternative if it is there.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: So Apple should be forced to always make sure that third-party hacks work, even though Apple does not promise iPod “Harmony” support or even mention it anywhere? In which universe exactly would such a lawsuit have any merit at all? The reason the iPod+iTunes combo works so well is that third-rate companies aren’t involved. If Real wants to sell songs that work with Apple’s iPod family of music players, they should develop a store that becomes so popular that Apple wishes to work with them. Or they should develop a player that becomes so popular that Apple decides to support it with their iTunes Music Store. Real should work on competing instead of trying to latch onto someone else’s successful enterprise like a parasite.
that’s right.
don’t bother clicking to see this idiot’s whole article… he’ll just think he’s doing a good job.
I’m guessing this will make all 10 iPod owners who were brave enough to buy songs from Real very happy.
ROFLMAO Sorry, I couldn’t keep a straight face for very long.
How do we know it was changed to block Harmony? If a lawsuit comes from this, the first question to come up will be what all changed and why. Until Apple gives that info, no one knows anything.
by the way, the timestamp shows 32 minutes with no dorky posts about being first…
did MDN finally grow up, or have we just blocked the a$$holes with nothing better to say?
A lawsuit would be good, Real Networks would eventually go out of business from it.
The reason I can say that is because Apple is sitting on a ton of surplus cash at the moment, they can afford to keep a trial going, Real can not. Then once Apple wins the case, sue Real for lost profits from the trial.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
I’ll rant here since I couldn’t post on the linked site.
This is the dumbest line of thinking I’ve seen on this topic so far.
The fact is, to run software (MS or non-MS) on a windows PC (which most people do, at least in business), you need to buy a Windows licence from Microsoft. That is the nature of their monopoly.
Apple does not have a monopoly with the iPod. Not only does the iPod support a pretty wide range of file types, but you have options besides the iPod if you define the “need” as a device to listen to digital music files. If you don’t like Apple/iPod, go buy a Real or Dell and play your music on that.
You are only locked into the iPod if you CHOOSE to buy an iPod and ALSO buy iTunes songs in Fairplay AAC format.
This moron needs someone to explain the definition of a monopoly.
In any case, I don’t think Apple has much to worry about considering the non-penalties that MS received in their anti-trust settlements.
Gee, reminds me of Galoob suing the pants off of Nintendo in the late 80’s for not allowing their NES-enhancing Game Genie to be sold in the USA.
I really want to believe Apple’s in the right with this decision, but I can’t find one ethical reason to think that way.
From another thread…
Apple ‘invented’ the ‘iPod’. Apple gets to ‘choose’ which software that they want to interoperate with it, not Real.
I think you need to consider what has been done – and what the ‘collateral damage’ is.
If I may… Apple disabled ‘Harmony’, the ‘collateral damage’ would be that Real’s AAC files are now ALSO (unfortunately?) disabled.
And if you extend my ‘observation’ further, you’ll notice that Apple doesn’t seem to be worried about whether or not all of people’s MP3s are legal – they still play WITH ITUNES! Get it? The optimum solution for Apple to SUPPORT: Apple iPod is ‘controlled’ by Apple iTunes software.
FWIW, I agree with some in-as-much that the iPod ‘could’ have more ‘chooses’ for legal downloads (perhaps more ‘stores’ available, WITHIN iTunes!). But as an Apple iPod user I’ll ‘side with’ Apple in the belief that iTunes is the optimum ‘software solution’ when using an iPod.
The author is off base. Real wouldn’t have anything to sue over. And, at this point does anyone really know what Apple changed or why, no!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
And his point about Ford changing wire harnesses being wrong, They do that all the time, every new/updated model.
—–
I thinks the fact that nobody noticed for almost a month pretty much says Real’s investment in reverse engineering was a total waste. They probably wrote it off on their PR budget
Apple did not agree to support Reals hack application Harmony therefore there is no case period!
So all the people who go kicked off Xbox Live can use the same defense. “I used a hack, so you should support it.” Since MS hasn’t payed anyone off yet, I don’t see Apple changing this.
It also took a month for it to be found out too. I guess Real didn’t want their sales to go down until the last minute, when someone called them up and said, “It doesn’t work on my iPod, whats going on.” Or they were trying to hack it again before people found out.
I disagree with your analysis that Apple should have to support thrid party ‘hacks.’ Firmware to the ipod is no different than the OS of a computer. If an OS vendor updates the software and third party drivers or hacks do not work, the third party company needs to react, not the OS company. Now if the OS company promised compatitbility with the third party company’s hack, then that is a different story.
Your analysis of Ford is also wrong. Carmakers will often make radio changes from stadard DIN chasis mount radios. An exapmple is the Ford Taurus which has an oval radio which integrates HVAC controls. Third part companies have made adapters ot hacks to allow aftermarket stereos work. If Ford comes out wth a new Taurus with a different radio design, they are not liable because the old adaptyer does not work.
Should Verizon be sued because their phones cannot be deactivated and then utilized in the Cingular service. I think not.
In the cellphone business, people have a choice to pick one service or another and the phones are not interchangable. And no one is complaining.
The iPod/iTunes combo is no different. People can choose the other network (WMA format) to play with other ‘networks’ or they can choose the Apple network. The consumer has a choice.
When Real decides to open their online music distribution beyond the Windows-only market, I might then have some symphony for them. As it stands now, the preached “freedom” and did not deliver!
Harmony should be about multiple platforms, not the “it only works on Windows” nonsense!
This writer’s analogy is seriously screwed up. How exactly is a radio essential to the running of a car? For the analogy to make sense, his argument should be that Ford should allow other ENGINES to run in their cars. Which is, of course, ridiculous.
Watch out! Sony’s going to sue Apple next because they purposefully engineered the iPod to not work with minidiscs!
All other companies should sue Apple for making the iPod so well that all other products look so crappy they are not selling. C’mon, no one should ever be allowed in business to develop and commercialize a product so much better than the others. This is business malpractice!
Sitting back and allowing Real’s songs to work on the iPod would be seen as an unofficial endorsement by Apple and down the road would be obligated to make sure the hack works on their iPod. Apple’s action PREVENTS non suspecting users from buying songs that will or may not work in the future!
If real wants to sell music that works on Apple’s iPods, all they have to do is,
1. Sell CD’s. They work great!
2. Sell mp3’s or AAC music that does not have copy protection. (Most CD’s don’t have copy protection)
Dear Steve,
I know that I wasn’t invited to your last party… and I know that your other guests didn’t want me there either… and I know that I crashed it against “most” peoples wishes, but I promise that this time I’ll behave and play fair and live in harmony if you would only send me an invitation….. I promise… plese… oh please.. oh please.
Sincerly,
Robert Glaser
CEO RealNetworks
Dear Rob,
I’m truly sorry, but I must also withhold an invitation to the next party as well. As soon as you learn how to behave in public, I will reconsider.
Yours truly,
Steven Jobs
CEO Apple Computer, Inc.
CEO Pixar
If you have a problem, THEN DON’T BUY A FORD!!! (according to the writers analogy)
No one is forcing you…
Or, another way to look at it may be….
Since “Harmony” was a “hack” in the first place…. it was probably seen as a “security hole”…. and, thus… treated in the same regard….
The “security hole” was patched…. by Apple… and Glaser is left sitting in the back of his Krispy Kreme truck…
Good point MDN! That’s exactly why Microsoft should block Apple from being at ALL able to work with Windows. That way Apple can in no way communicate with Microsoft computers. I mean, why should Microsoft worry about another company’s product? They never mention Mac OS support anywhere! If Apple wants to get in on it, they should develop a computer that’s as successful as the Windows computer, rather than leeching off them.
“this alteration of the iPod specifically to block a competitor”
Another journalist trying a case in the media. Can the accuser prove that Apple made the change specifically and only to block Real’s (dis)Harmony? Apple stated when Real (Steal?) announced Harmony that future releases of iPod software, hardware, and firmware might break harmony and that was Real’s problem to solve for its own customers, not Apple’s. As well it should be.
I love my ipod. But I think this guy has a point!
(The site has articles that say good stuff about iPods, so he isn’t just some anti-ipod jerk)
Who is Apple to stop me from buying music from some one who wanted to support the ipod!!!
I know we would all call Gates the great satan if all the sudden iTunes didn’t run on Windows.
Now I am being forced to buy music at iTunes. Maybe I don’t want to buy a whole CD or steal music. So what choice do I have, none!!!!
I have seen people cry because people don’t port stuff to the Mac. Why the heck would Real or Microsoft offer their stuff on Mac when users sound like kool-aid drinking drones that will cheer Apple even when they take stuff from us, like choice!!!
Its enough to make me hope someone builds something as good as the iPod so I can get out from under Apple’s thumb.
I was thinking about buying a Mac, because I liked my ipod so much. I am not ready to become a drone for any company Apple or Microsoft.
Yeah Russell, Microsoft SHOULD block Windows computers from working with anyone else’s products AT ALL.
That’ll finish them off once and for all.
“down” – not really, even if it is going dark at 4pm.
The true issue is whether there is misuse of monopoly power. Monopolies are completely legal in the U.S. and most of the world. Misuse of the power of the monopoly is not. One misuse it the use of the monopoly power to create a commanding market share or monopoly in another area in which the company does not currently have a monopoly. Another misuse is using the current monopoly power to create circumstances which unjustly maintain that original monopoly.
In the first misuse listed above, Microsoft was convicted of using its monopoly power to create a commanding market share in another segment. Microsoft had a 90+% market share of ALL desktop operating systems. This was not a 90+% market share of just Intel based computer operating systems. This was not a 90+% market share of just AMD based computer operating systems. This was not a 90+% market share of ANY single segement of the desktop computer operating system market. Microsoft was declared as having a 90+% market share of ALL desktop computer operating systems. Thus it was declared a monopoly. Microsoft was then convicted of using this monopoly power to illegally create a commanding market share in a very different segment of the market: the browser market. The appeals court upheld this conviction.
Note that Microsoft was not convicted or even tried for the second type of misuse. Microsoft was not pursued for trying to maintain its 90+% share of ALL desktop computer operating systems. There have been many stories over the years of how Microsoft has changed MS-DOS and Windows to make it not work with other operating systems. None of these allegations have even been found to have enough merit to have charges filed, let alone go to trial.
In a similar vein…
Apple does not have a 90+% market share of ALL portable music players. Some sources put Apple’s market share at above 90% for just the portable, hard drive based, digital music players. Apple has no standing at all in Flash Memory based players. Apple has no standing at all in CD based portable players. Apple has no standing at all in tape based portable players. Clearly Apple does not have a monopoly in the arena of ALL portable music players.
Thus Apple has no monopoly power to misuse. Any suit based upon Apple misusing its “power” would be thrown out as baseless. Period.