“The market for legitimate music downloads is booming, but the stumbling block of incompatibility will not go away. Just ask anyone who has ever tried to put a Napster track on an iPod,” Brian Garrity writes for Billboard.
MacDailyNews Take: Why settle for asking just one? Ask all three of them.
Garrity writes, “Experts say the DRM dilemma might not be resolved for another two years. ‘It’s not going to go away quickly,’ Napster chief technology officer William Pence said at a recent DRM conference in New York.”
MacDailyNews Take: If Napster executives are such DRM experts, why do they use Microsoft’s WMA DRM instead of developing their own? Why two years? Is that how long Napster figures they’ll last?
Garrity writes, “Microsoft’s Windows Media DRM is supported on more than 60 devices and used for digital files sold by dozens of retailers, including Napster, AOL, Yahoo, RealNetworks, Virgin, FYE and Wal-Mart. Apple’s DRM is called Fair Play [sic] and works only in Apple-controlled products and services like the iPod and the iTunes Music Store.”
MacDailyNews Take: Apple’s iTunes Music Store is the only store mentioned above that supports both Mac and Windows. All of the rest that Garrity mentions support only Windows. Apple has sold more songs online than the rest of the above-mentioned outfits combined. Apple’s AAC with FairPlay DRM is the de facto standard for legal online music files. Would it matter if Windows Media were supported by over 60,000 devices if nobody were buying and using them?
MacDailyNews Major Annnouncement: We have developed a car that runs on maple syrup! Exxon is stifling the growth of our product – they need to install maple syrup pumps in their stores! In addition, we’ve developed a maple syrup pump for maple syrup cars! Toyota are stifling the growth of our maple syrup pumps – they need to make cars that run on maple syrup! We’re waiting for The New Zealand Herald and Billboard to pick up our story and help us whine to a larger audience.
Garrity writes, “As more consumers go digital, the compatibility issues between Apple and Microsoft become more pronounced. Apple, the early market leader, has been particularly resistant to shaking hands in the interest of compatibility.”
MacDailyNews Take: The vast majority of consumers are choosing iPods and using Apple’s iTunes Music Store on their Macs or Windows PCs. A song is a song and Apple offers the largest legal music library at consistent prices. Why should Apple give away their business to other music outfits or sell songs for players from which they derive no profit? Solely for the “interest of compatibility?” That’s some business plan. Apple would have a tough time getting shareholder approval for that one.
Garrity writes, “More than 184 million digital tracks were sold in the United States this year through the end of July, according to Nielsen SoundScan. That is almost double the amount sold during the same period in 2004. Still, some digital-music executives say compatibility problems are slowing the growth of legitimate download sales and subscription services.”
MacDailyNews Take: Apple’s iTunes Music Store surpassed 300 million songs sold on March 2, 2005 and surpassed 500 million songs on July 18, 2005. Thats’ over 200 million songs right there, in only 4 and a half months. It’s a safe bet that of the 184 million songs sold in the U.S. that Garrity mentions, almost all of them were sold by Apple. So, Apple is slowing down the growth of legitimate download sales? Come on. Apple created the market and it responsible for nearly all of its growth. Apple’s slowing down subscription services somewhat, maybe, since Apple doesn’t offer that option (mainly because it still hasn’t proven to be worth it), but consumers clearly seem to want to own their music much more than they want to rent it, as Apple proven over half a billion times. The only real growth Apple has slowed is the growth of their competitors.
Garrity continues, “Even the CD presents DRM issues, because Apple has not licensed Fair Play for inclusion on copy-protected discs, thus making secure CDs incompatible with the iPod, the most popular portable player with more then 15 million units sold.”
MacDailyNews Take: Those so-called CDs are not Red Book compliant, so they are not even CDs. Apple has sold well over 21 million iPods and counting.
Full article here.
The only people whining are portable digital device makers, online music outfits, and DRM peddlers that are not named Apple. Consumers, meanwhile, are happily buying iPods, importing music from Red Book compliant Compact Discs that they own, and using the iTunes Music Store on both Macs and PCs. The whining that we hear is coming from companies that are losing or have already lost to Apple’s superior symbiotic music solution, iPod+iTunes+iTunes Music Store, not from consumers.
The online music outfits are quite unhappy because the music they sell can’t easily and seamlessly be played on the device most people have chosen to own, Apple’s iPod. The portable digital music player makers are unhappy because very few want their players. People obviously want iPods instead and also wish to utilize Apple’s iTunes Music Store for it’s large library, podcast features, liberal DRM, consistent pricing, exclusives, etc. Microsoft is doubly unhappy because their proprietary WMA DRM is not the de facto standard for portable digital music player or online music services. These three factions, the online music outfits, the portable digital music player makers, and Microsoft, will continue the wails of their death throes via willing and/or ignorant media outlets, but that doesn’t mean that Apple has to change a thing until or unless they see a sound business case for doing so.
It’s the losers (Napster, Microsoft, Sony, Creative, iRiver, RealNetworks, etc.) that are whining. Not music buyers. Not music player buyers. Not Apple. Apple is too busy selling iPods and music online to care about the losers’ sour grapes.
Lastly, achieving a monopoly is legal. It’s monopoly abuse that is illegal, as Microsoft knows all too well. Apple isn’t forcing anyone to buy iPods or use their iTunes Music Store. Consumers are choosing to do so of their own free will. In droves.
[UPDATE: 8/13, 10:05am ET: Changed headline.]
Related article:
The New Zealand Herald serves up a steaming pile of iPod FUD – August 11, 2005
The de facto standard for legal digital online music files: Apple’s protected MPEG-4 Audio (.m4p) – December 15, 2004
If you own an iPod or use iTunes and can get the songs/albums you want from Apple, why would you want to buy crappy WMA/Janus DRM files from the also-rans?
The world’s largest retailer, Wal-Mart, has figured this out and is now selling iTunes pre-paid cards. Notice how you don’t see the signs plugging their music store all over the music dept. anymore?
Just want to make it clear: It’s Microsoft’s proprietary DRM for WMA that locks you into Windows. I’m giving that DRM the name PlaysforSure, which means that it maybe plays for sure; you need to try it first.
iTunes provides an option for you to convert non-DRMed WMA into AAC or MP3. And the iTunes choice plays for sure with an iPod and iTMS.
the recording industry, for obvious reasons, wants its product to be compatible with as much of the hardware out there as possible. in other words, the industry is hardware agnostic. it deffinitely does not want Apple to control the distribution of its product and be the only maker of hardware that can play its product. there is a risk of that happening if iTunes with its proprietary DRM supplants the traditional distribution network. that means Apple must license FairPlay or make an enemy of the recording industry. The recording industry wants to copy protect future CDs. If Apple won’t license FairPlay for CD playback, then there will be no CDs compatible with the iPod in the future.
if you use an iPod, why would you want to buy anywhere else? is there a lot of music out there that’s available on other stores but not on iTMS? is it so much cheaper that it’s worth your time to check out all sorts of stores and know about all different kinds of usage rules about your music? is it the subscription option? why?
“MacDailyNews Take: Why settle for asking just one? Ask all three of them.”
ROFL!
MDN has crawled so far up Apple’s ass that is pathetic…some MDN takes are good, while others read like the product of a badly trained defense attorney. Take:
“Consumers, meanwhile, are happily buying iPods, importing music from Red Book compliant Compact Discs that they own, and using the iTunes Music Store on both Macs and PCs.”
Could you be a little more obvious with the “Red Book compliant Compact Disc” crap? And making sure to leave out any mention of consumers that would like to stream through anything other than airport express?
I don’t mind the constant brown running from MDN’s ass about what is good for Apple as a company–obviously if you like the company’s products you want the company to do well so they continue to make said products.
However, pretending that incompatibility is good for consumers, or not that big a deal for consumers, is a load of crap. We can take for granted that Microsoft and the labels don’t care about consumers. I will faithfully submit that Apple doesn’t care about music consumers in a moral or ethical sense either. Who does that leave to speak for consumers? Well, sites like MDN–except that MDN doesn’t give a crap about consumers, either, except to the extent that they keep shoveling money into Apple’s trough.
Someone please explain to me how it is in my interest, as a consumer, that Apple will not license Fairplay so that Fairplay encoded tracks and be put side-by-side with WMA coded tracks on copy-protected CDs. Explain why it is in my interest as a consumer that I can’t play music tracks I’ve purchased from iTMS through a Roku device without jumping through hoops. Explain why it is in my interest as a consumer that an indie label that wants to offer its tracks online only has the option of selling them as WMA files if they want copy protection–or signing a deal with Apple and hoping Apple chooses to offer some of their tracks on iTMS.
I can understand Apple not wanting to pay a licensing fee to MS and therefore not selling WMA tracks or WMA-playability on the iPod. What I can’t understand is Apple not spreading Fairplay vertically through the consumer electronics market–licensing to labels, licensing to Roku and other hardware manufacturers. But what I find incredibly perplexing is MDN’s stance that this is good for consumers.
OpJ,
MDN/iPodDN’s stance doesn’t seem to be that “this is good for consumers.” The way I read it, their stance seems to be: let the market do the choosing and don’t let the whining of the losers color your opinion of the winner.
Apple needs to stay the course. They also need to get off their asses and get me a remote for Airport Express, but I think a lot of stuff is coming with Intel Inside that won’t be just Macs, but also entertainment-related. I think Steve Jobs has a lot up his sleeve that we cannot even imagine, yet.
OpJ-
Have you looked at the song sales chart for iTMS recently? (If you haven’t, it shows an accelerating upward slope over the last few months).
** If ** iTMS sales were starting to flatten out or contract, or iPod sales were in the same situation, then I could see a good case for reaching out to other standards. You could have iTMS sell songs to people with non-iPod players that way, or if iPod implemented WMA, it could possibly play songs from other stores. That time hasn’t come yet. Like the MDN response pointed out, if you buy a WMA player you certainly have plenty of music store choices.
One thing that no chart or survey is able to measure is how many millions of songs have been getting ripped onto iPod from the piles and piles of CD’s that typical music fans have around their house, or how many dusty MP3 files from the free trading days of Napster are being loaded onto iPods. Would you guess that those total numbers are higher or lower than the total iTMS tracks sold?
You really have to look very hard to find an iPod buyer that is rationally complaining about a lack of ways to get music onto their player. The MDN take about the whining coming from the also-rans, is spot on.
Cliff’s notes version for the consumer:
step 1. buy any music player you like.
step 2. load songs onto it using whatever avenues work for you. iPod offers several routes to do this; other players do as well.
there is no step 3.
Apple is in no danger of an anti-trust issue. Unlike MSFT, Apple has done nothing to “force” its products onto the marketplace, unless you consider making a better product “force”.
Consider this: WMA does not work on Mac, iTunes works on Mac and Windows. If anybody is being hurt it is users of WMA BECAUSE it is not cross platform.
Windows consumers can buy any of 60+/- devices and shop about a dozen different music stores. They have elected to buy iPod and shop iTMS.
Mac users only have one option BECAUSE MSFT refuses to port WMA to the Mac platform.
Creative, Rio, Samsung, Sony, Archos, Virgin et al are failing because they make an inferior product. Not because Apple is doing something underhanded.
Napster, Real, Rapsody et al are failing because they use inferior technology. Not because Apple is doing something underhanded.
Two years ago there were well over 100 different MP3 players on the market. Today there are about 60. The consolidation of the weaker makers is in full steam. All the rantings from makers and services are the squealings of firms in their death throes.
The record labels have a huge stake in who wins. Initially they were delighted when Apple showed them the way. Now they are scared to death that they will have to dance to Apple’s tune. They ignore what the consequences would have been had MSFT dominated with WMA.
Why won’t any of these other music distributors let me into their sites so I can buy their music? I don’t care what format the music is in. I’ll buy it and make it work. I don’t even own an iPod. I just want to buy and download their music. But they won’t let me into their music sites merely because I’m on a Mac. Why? It’s not fair!
Mark: that’s kinda the point–Apple isn’t letting the market do the choosing. The market has chosen the iPod–as it should, the iPod is head and shoulders above any of the competition, and keeps getting better. The iPod is so much better than competing products that it is hard to explain why the other players are as bad as they are. However, Apple is then sitting there like a rock. In digital music sales they not only are trying to leverage the market’s choice of the iPod as a mandated choice of iTMS as the only music store, but also aren’t letting anyone have any other way to get copy protected tracks onto the iPod. If you are a music act that wants to sell your tracks online and doesn’t want to release your tracks unprotected, you have only one way to get tracks easily onto an iPod–iTMS. And if iTMS doesn’t want to offer your tracks, you are shit out of luck. How’s that the market chosing?
How is the market chosing when you have to buy tracks from iTMS instead of buying a CD, because the CD is copy protected and Apple won’t license Fairplay. Where’s the market choice there? How do you know that the market, if given a choice, wouldn’t want a CD that can be played on a CD player and has Fairplay tracks ready to copy directly to iPod, without having to rip the CD?
How is the market chosing when the option available is to get either get an Airport Express plug that does music-streaming as a side-feature, with no remote, display, etc. or get a Roku device that does all those things but can’t stream Fairplay tracks?
And how’s the market chosing when there are products that won’t get offered in the first place because they aren’t marketable if they can’t play Fairplay tracks, and Apple won’t let them work with Fairplay tracks.
If you are getting in the way of consumers making choices and making one choice (iPod) determine other choices then you are not letting the market decide–you are interfering with the market.
Again, it is fine to support that as long as you are honest and admitting that you are flacking for the company, not for the users. Personally, I’m more impressed by a site that is on my side, instead of being a company whore.
Whoa, wait, what:
“Lastly, achieving a monopoly is legal. It’s monopoly abuse that is illegal, as Microsoft knows all too well. Apple isn’t forcing anyone to buy iPods or use their iTunes Music Store. Consumers are choosing to do so of their own free will. In droves.”
Microsoft was caught for a monopoly for forcing people to use Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player because nothing else would work. When you by iPods, nothing else works behind iTunes. You make it seem like people are making a conscious decision to choose both individually, and they just so happen to work together. Really, for some people they buy one and are FORCED to use the other.
It’s so funny when the shoe is on the other foot. None of these people would be worried about compatibility if Apple was not the standard. They can’t sell their crap so they want legislative help.
Grow up!
Putty–try reading my comment. Reading is fundamental. Helps avoid a lot of unnecessary conflicts–like this one. Did I mention anything about Apple supporting other codecs? Or selling other codecs? Or building more into iTunes or the iPod? Crap–I just went back and looked and it appears that I didn’t.
What I *did* write is that Apple is behaving badly by not licensing Fairplay and thereby restricting both the variety of music, hardware and ancillary products that are available.
I fail to see how that is in the interest of the consumer–and fail to see how that deserves cheerleading from the site that should be written in the interest of its readers, not a corporation.
In the digital music field you are seeing big monsters fighting, and people getting stepped on. MDN is too busy cheering on one of the monsters to give a crap about the people.
OpJ-
Apple has provided a solution for one of the issues you raise. On a Mac, you can in fact rip the audio off of the so-called “copy protected” CD’s.
Perhaps Windows Vista will also include this advanced feature.
The copy-protected CD idea is a non starter – there are too many millions of dumb CD players in cars and boom boxes everywhere, for the music companies to be able to release any new “compact discs” that won’t play in them. As long as that fact remains in effect, it will be technically possible to rip audio off of those unencrpted portions of the disc, and iTunes on Mac demonstrates that.
You also ask “How is the market choosing” and I think the answer is about the same as any other market – one buyer at a time.
Although there is probably a factor similar to the one which has made Windows so big, which is the “I want what all my friends have” effect. Windows had about 10 years in the marketplace before any serious “antitrust” concerns were raised in the courts; Apple deserves at least that long to see if they can hold off the yearly swarm of “iPod killers” I keep reading about.
The problem with a lot of these discussions is people keep confusing choice before the sale with choice after the sale. Before you choose a music player, decide which services you would like to be able to use. Ask your friends that have other brands of player, what they use. And then decide.
If you find that you made a boo-boo and don’t like the choices available after buying somebody’s player, sell it and get one you like better.
OpJ: “The” CD is copy protected? Are you assuming that all CDs will be copy protected? Perhaps they will but they sure aren’t now and as such, it’s a bit of a stretch to be implying that Apple is depriving CD owners of copying capabilities by refusing to license its DRM.
If you are going to make your assertions based on how you guess things will work out to be in the future .. you might as well get with the program and guess that Apple is doing all the right things, both for itself, for the developing market and most importantly .. for the consumer.
“Before you choose a music player, decide which services you would like to be able to use. Ask your friends that have other brands of player, what they use. And then decide.”
And this why, Putty, you are an idiot. (I call myself a jerk, so I don’t feel bad about calling anyone else an idiot.)
Chosing a player shouldn’t have anythign to do with choosing services. One is a player. A chunk of plastic and metal. The other are software services, auxillary products, etc. etc. etc. Anyone wanting to offer a product–software, hardware, anything–compatible with a particular player ought to be free to do so. Not free as in no cost, necessarily. But there shouldn’t be a manufacturer standing there saying, “No.”
There is absolutely nothing in it for the consumer for a manufacturer–Apple or anyone else–standing in the way of what you can do with the product you’ve purchased. To take the side of the manufacturer is to be a sycophantic little asspuppy.
Hope you enjoy your time in Steve’s colon.
OpJ, I can see you’re frustrated.
I think the summary of Apple’s behavior is very simple really.
They won’t do anything to jeopardize their business position. In the position they are in at this time, it would not make any sense to make life easier for the competition. I would expect the competition to also avoid doing anything that would weaken their business (multi million dollar super bowl ads aside)
If you were the CEO, what changes would you make to the iPod/iTunes product? Maybe if you posted a specific idea, it could be discussed more rationally (and we could see both sides of it). I’ll stand by my earlier assertion, if market conditions change suuch that opening up FairPlay would be important to Apple, they will do it. At present that would be a bad move – it only makes life easier for competitors.
I believe Apple is keeping the workings of FairPlay close to the vest because they do not want a re-play of the DVD CSS problem where DVD ripping software became commonplace.
An unrelated question, I wonder if one boots that hacked OS X for x86 on an Intel machine, if it can rip “copy protected” CD’s ?
What should competitors be doing to take a bite out of iPod? cut prices?
Great takes, MDN.
If Apple has slowed the growth of digital music, Microsoft has put the computer industry decades behind with its predatory behaviour.
MW: “Respect” the better product
You are not “forced” to use iTMS if you buy an iPod.
Rip CDs into it or buy WMA DRM tracks from any other online service (of course you’re stuck having to use a Windows PC for that) and burn a CD, take the quality hit and import into iTunes – or use P2P at your own risk.
In fact, you are not “forced” to buy an iPod to use Apple’s iTunes and/or iTunes Music Store.
Face it, naysayers, Apple has constructed the perfect trio, iPod+iTunes+iTunes Music Store. Neither iPod nor iTunes Music Store requires the other and Apple isn’t forcing anything on anybody.
MDN/iPodDN said it best above and also here:
Enjoying Apple’s iTunes and iTunes Music Store without owning an iPod
iPodDN MW: “fact” (and I swear to God that’s really the MW)
From TFA: Even the CD presents DRM issues, because Apple has not licensed Fair Play for inclusion on copy-protected discs, thus making secure CDs incompatible with the iPod
This has to be one of the most backwards, and causally confused statements i have read with respect to this issue. The problem is not Apple’s unwillingness to license FairPlay, it is the labels’ decision to put DRM on CDs. That is what is causing the incompatibility.
Yet somehow the labels believe the best way to combat piracy is to encumber the usage rights of people who are actually buying CDs. Brilliant! Here’s how the phases break down:
1. Piss off existing customers
2. ???
3. Profit!
Oh … by the way … God bless you MDN. This is most excellent work, and on a Saturday morning too! Put your feet up for the rest of the day. You deserve it
First take = instant classic
/off to buy some iTMS tracks through the MDN affiliate link.
be nice to MS and support WMA. Only MS can truly make the world open and available to all.
How can you be so stubborn to the altruistic angels of MS.
Apple is offering a product that is selling. The same product is available in many other forms and places, physical locations and over the internet.
The competition is offering the same exact content, and virtually identical products as well.
So why must Apple open up their product to the competition? It may be in their best interest for greater iPod sales, but they will hold that trump card and make that decision when the market dictates it.
–As an aside, MS was taken to court for attempting to actually sabotage their competition in various forms. Apple is simply creating and selling a popular product, their own product, and it is available to all computer users.