“Released in the late 1970s, the Apple II was the original sexy personal computer, the one that started the whole revolution. By the late 1980s, though, Apple had been relegated to a runner-up position by the onslaught of Microsoft’s DOS and the IBM PC clones,” Michael Stroud writes for AlwaysOn.
“One big reason why: Apple never relinquished its primary intellectual property. It maintained tight control over its operating system, hardware, and peripherals, while Gates and IBM licensed their technology to all comers. Apple’s market dominance was overwhelmed by cheaper, less inspired products,” Stroud writes. “Fast forward to 2005. The iPod dominates the digital music market. No other device is cool enough for teenagers, despite its higher price tag. Competitors are swarming. Napster, Yahoo, and Real have introduced portable music subscription standards, with phone maker Ericsson announcing a broad partnership last week. Sprint and other cellular carriers are streaming music and music videos. Nokia is loading Microsoft music software on some of its phones.”
“Meanwhile, Apple refuses to open up its product to competitive standards like Real and Windows Media,” Stroud writes. “Is Apple about to be overwhelmed again? Or has Steve Jobs learned from the past? …To keep its dominance, Apple will have to do some ballsy things, like create a portable subscription service, integrate WiFi, cellular, and video and—yes—open up the iPod to competitive standards like Windows Media and Real.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: iPod is not the Mac. Music is music and the same song can easily be encoded in AAC with FairPlay DRM for Apple’s iTunes Music Store with the click of a mouse. It’s not like writing entire complex applications for the Mac or Windows. Apple seems to be innovating the iPod well enough to continue dominating the market for the foreseeable future and rumors of new iPod features hint at more innovations to come. Unless there is are financial benefits to supporting other competing formats, Apple is doing well to keep the iPod+iTunes symbiotic relationship as it is today.
since when is windows media competitive?
anyway, itunes can import wma, no problem there.
These articles have been done before, many many months ago…
I think this guy is a little late in his thesis, don’t you?
Help!
This board is gonna die of news related boredom
These “analysts” never seem to come up with anything new. Sometimes “closed systems” dominate the market (PS 2, XBox) and sometimes they don’t. Sometimes companies have good management (Apple now) and sometimes they don’t (Apple 1985 – 2000). Sometimes a great “closed system” can be screwed by horrendous management (Apple between 1985 and 2000.)
Up till now (three years running) nobody has come close to showing that Apple’s “closed system” won’t work. Consumers seem to realize that in many ways, Apple’s system is the most “open” system as far as they’re concerned.
You can use the iPod + iTunes on Windows, Mac and Linux. Now that’s an open system. None of the competition can say that.
He’s just repeating Microsoft’s marketing refrain. iPod users have no choice. Microsoft just doesn’t get it. When they bought an iPod the consumers made their choice. They picked the best system.
‘One big reason why: Apple never relinquished its primary intellectual property.’ Michael Stroud writes for AlwaysOn.
I suppose this guy has never heard of the deal John Sculley made with Mafiasoft, huh?
This guy’s a ‘tard.
If he knew anything about Apple history, he wouldn’t be writing this kind of crap.
MaWo: ‘nothing’. As in, that’s what he knows.
Windows Media and Real “competitive standards”?
Competitive maybe. Standards NO!
AAC is basically the next generation mp3. They really should have called it mp4, it would have stopped some confusion. It is a standard in that it is open, and anyone can use it. Windows Media and Real formats are NOT. They are closed proprietary formats.
The DRM attached to iTunes Music Store purchases is proprietary. But then, so is the DRM attached to any other music store.
I hate it when people call something a “standard” when its not. Like Word files. If they were a “standard”, anyone could use them. Grr
IBM did not license their hardware ip – it was copied because it was built with off the shelf parts and because microsoft would sell [licenses for] the operating system to anyone.
I hope they release some new features soon. The iPods haven’t had a refresh in a while (the 20 gig is only $50 cheaper than it was 1.5 years ago and they have only added a slightly new interface: gen 3 -> 4). They have only added the Shuffle, which apparently isn’t selling very well. I’m looking forward to seeing what comes with iTunes 5 and the new line of iPods.
Whoa, DreamTheEndless.
Take it easy, we can hear you.
“They have only added the Shuffle, which apparently isn’t selling very well.”
You’ve obviously never been to an Apple retail store. People buy these things like candy bars.
MW feed, as in don’t feed the trolls
MDN Take – “Music is music and the same song can easily be encoded in AAC with FairPlay DRM for Apple’s iTunes Music Store with the click of a mouse. It’s not like writing entire complex applications for the Mac or Windows.”
– True to a point, but oversimplified. The comparison to a Mac is not based on how easy it is to convert songs/applications to a new format, it’s based on whether Apple will allow it. Whether it is easy or not is a moot point if Apple won’t allow it in the first place.
“Unless there is are financial benefits”
– or how about consumer benefits? When you can’t find a CD at your local CD shop, you can always go shopping at ANY other CD shop. Not true with online purchases. People have mentioned that if they can’t find a song on iTMS or at a record store, they illegally download the song. Wouldn’t it be nice to shop at more than one online store? Maybe not too important right now, but what about in the not-too-distant future when other online stores offer songs that iTMS doesn’t have?
I wouldn’t mind the ability to play RealPlayer files with my iPod. I have about 250 sermons encoded with RealPlayer going back all the way to 1999, when I first started archiving and uploading my sermons to the internet for streaming play. I still upload them in RealPlayer format because the size of the files is at least a full MB smaller per sermon than mp3 files. I would gladly shift if the file-size per sermon could be reduced a bit more. On-line storage space is a real issue.
Want to read something funny…all the iPod competitors interviewed in FastCompany…Clueless…
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/95/fast-talk-extra.html
Read the comments for an additional fun time
to fandango –
I know, I just get so tired of seeing comparisons about apple not licensing their tech like IBM did. IBM never wanted clones, but they had them because of how easy it was to buy those standard intel microprocessors and because microsoft would sell the OS to everyone.
After all that – what did IBM get out of it? Nothing. No money, no license fees, no business –
IBM doesn’t even sell personal computers anymore BECAUSE of all the clones; apple started selling personal computers before IBM did, and they still sell them.
Why in the world would apple want to do to their personal computer business the actions that killed the personal computer business for IBM?
Why is apple constantly compared to IBM?
I don’t get it.
However, the author does bring up a valid point – Apple must keep improving the iPod, which is the entire reason iTMS is so successful, because iPod is the best device out there. There are many features people would like to see added, and that competitors are adding. Apple needs to not sit around and let the iPod gather dust, but must keep innovating the player. While many of these features are available with third party add-ons (FM tuner, voice recorder, etc.), and Apple likes having the attention of the aftermarket tuner crowd, it MUST keep the iPod at least on par with other players so that it avoids looking stale.
this article was written by stupid people..word of the day is “stupid”…as in, stupid ass Michael Stroud.
The notion that other online stores would offer songs that iTunes Music Store doesn’t seems pretty silly. Why would any recording company restrict the sale of its songs to NON-iTMS vendors when iTMS controls the overwhelming majority of the market??? Maybe this has happened very rarely, but it seems nuts to view this as a serious problem, especially since Apple would obviously want to add as many possible songs as are on the market (i.e., no risk that that they inventory too many CDs! of a song no one wants!).
The iPod dominates its market to a far greater extent than the Apple ][ did, even when it was ahead. The iPod has the iTMS to drive more sales. The iPod has a vast array of accessories that only work with the iPod.
In short, the iPod is not easily interchangable with other players. You can’t just switch to another player and get the same experience. So to assume that competitors will begin to take market share just because they’re there is foolish.
The Apple II was a business machine, bought by companies that didn’t care about anything but the bottom line, of course they’ll go for cheaper knock offs.
The iPod, on the other hand, is marketed to consumers who continue to pay extra for sexy name brands. How else does Gucci stay in business with such ridiculous pricing?
There is something that these critics dont seem to undestand –People dont buy the IPOD because it has the most at the lowest price–People buy it because it is the IPOD and the only way to own an IPOD is to buy
an IPOD. It is those who would like to compete with the IPOD who have to come up with the ideas–and they havent done it yet–and phones arent going to do it—AND–the IPOD is not a Wiffle ball–as good as an idea as the Wiffle was–there was very little brand identification going on–it wasnt as if kids would only play with a Wiffle ball when they wanted to play with a little plastic ball with holes in it—This was the pre-INTEL Apple Niche if there ever was one–innovation and pride of ownership–People who own APPLE really want to own Apple—there is an element of prestige along with the different. Pretty much there is no computer on the market like the dual G5 powermacs. To the guy that just cares about costs–there is no brand loyalty–its all in the sticker price or the deal he could get–he is willing to give up speed, comfort, features in order to get products that can just do the job he is buying it for at the cheapest price. If Apple is going that way Apple is over–Thats what will kill the IPOD or any other device Jobs markets. I wanted to write Ted Turner with a brilliant idea I had recently–a 24 hours news network–Hasnt that been done? What about CNN? CNN is 24 hours of canned news and aaron brown and larry king—Im talking about 24 hours of reporting from the scene of the news–well more on this later–I now feel like writing Jobs and and giving him the idea for a computer company the consumer can trust and computer the consumer can be proud to own–God knows it shouldnt run windows. Hey–where are you standing if its not illegal to burn the flag there?—In a free country.
It seems bizarre to me that the train of thought here is that Apple, know for its creative and innovative work needs to be told to be creative and innovative! They are obviously doing a great job. Let’s leave it to them to continue their work.
I think the last thing Apple needs to do is add a bunch of features to the iPod to make it all things to everyone. The simplicity is the genius. Turning phones into radios and toaster ovens into televisions never works in the long run.
Hey if it works don’t fix it or change it. How much more can you do with the best player on the market? Why does it have to be changed. It has the best controls, the best software, and is the easiest to use. Has plenty of storage and plenty of battery life. I think the iPod will see well for years just like it is unless some other new technology is invented. And if it is it might just come from Apple anyways.
lisa,
I don’t even know where to start… did you forget to take your meds today?
I’m sorry…. really.. I was just lost trying to comprehend your point. Honestly, I really tried.