“Let me present the first ‘This Won’t Work With That’ awards, honoring self-serving perpetrators of toxic incompatibilities,” Steven Levy writes for Newsweek.
Levy writes, “Third prize goes to the satellite radio services Sirius and XM. It’s a good idea to offer people the opportunity to subscribe to quality, ad-free radio, but a bad idea to have two systems that don’t work with each other… Second prize goes to Apple CEO Steve Jobs for selling songs on the iTunes Music Store that play on iPods, but not on anyone else’s music players. Also, Apple has rigged the iPod so that (un-less [sic] you perform some digital surgery) songs purchased from other online stores won’t play on it. Jobs’s explanation is that it’s not something users are asking for, and if a groundswell of users clamor for compatibility, he’ll consider it. Take my word for it, Steve—when people pay for music, they want it to be playable on any device they choose… And the grand-prize winner? America Online, for shamefully maintaining AOL Instant Messenger (AIM) as a closed system.”
Full article here.
Advertisement: The New iPod with Video. The ultimate music + video experience on the go. From $299. Free shipping.
Apple’s iTunes Music Store sells music (and video) for iPods. It works seamlessly for the end user. If you buy an also-ran digital player, you don’t get Apple iTunes in the box, so use whatever service that player maker recommends, if it’s still in business. Good luck. Our advice, buy an iPod and use the iTunes Music Store. That way, you’ll get the best device, use the best jukebox software, and get the best, most-comprehensive online store. What Levy complains about is obviously not something many users are asking for, since iTunes Music Store dominates its market even more than the iPod dominates the portable digital music player market.
Only Apple’s iTunes Music Store supports both Mac and Windows PC users. So, Levy should really be awarding the Napsters, Yahoos, and whatever other outfits are still operating his award for supporting only Windows PCs and leaving Mac users to, as usual, “settle” for the best. It’s interesting that Levy singles out Apple’s iTunes Music Store, the only major online music store that supports both Mac and Windows users, but doesn’t complain that, oh, for example, Sony PlayStation games aren’t playable in Microsoft’s Xbox and vice versa, or that, hmm, Autodesk doesn’t make AutoCAD for Mac OS X, Microsoft rigging Outlook to make it difficult to move information to Mac OS X’s Mail*, Motorola cell phone batteries don’t power Nokia phones, or even that GM auto parts don’t work in Fords.
Of course, iPods also play a variety of formats, of course, including AAC (16 to 320 Kbps), Protected AAC (from iTunes Music Store), MP3 (16 to 320 Kbps), MP3 VBR, Audible (formats 2, 3 and 4), Apple Lossless, WAV, AIFF. And Apple’s iTunes software application supports importing in high-quality AAC, high bit-rate MP3 with no extra fee, AIFF CD audio, and automatic conversion of your existing music collection from unprotected WMA, among other formats.
Apple’s iTunes Music Store exists to provide content for Mac and Windows personal computer and iPod users. It doesn’t exist to provide content for Apple’s iPod “competitors.” Consumers don’t seem to have a problem with iPod+iTunes, but certain writers and Apple competitors certainly do. If people suddenly started flocking to an iPod and/or iTunes competitor, Apple would surely consider licensing FairPlay. Of course, as Levy probably knows, people are flocking to iPod+iTunes, so the issue and Levy’s second place “award” are meaningless.
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.
* To free yourself from one of the most-blatant of self-serving Microsoft’s toxic incompatibilities and get your stuff the hell out of Outlook and onto your Mac, take a look at Little Machine’s US$10 Outlook2Mac: http://www.littlemachines.com/
Related articles:
Apple’s roadkill whine in unison: ‘incompatibility is slowing growth of digital music’ – August 12, 2005
The de facto standard for legal digital online music files: Apple’s protected MPEG-4 Audio (.m4p) – December 15, 2004
Levy fails to mention that the key to my Honda doesn’t work on his Mercedes. Shame on automakers.
MW: gave. We gave them there journalists way too much freedom to be dumbasses.
Listen, y’all. Steven Levy is the founding father of Mac boosterism, being the author of “Insanely Great” and all. He’s not just another Mac basher.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0140291776/getamac
Excellent take. I tell people this all the time. You can burn CDs from iTunes and play them anywhere you like. You can rip songs from your personal CDs and put them on your iPod.
No one is being forced to do anything. Get a life, Levy.
~M
Heroin,
I don’t give a rat’s ass if Levy is Steve Jobs’ biological father – he’s flat out wrong here.
I think it’s funny for him to say that “Apple has rigged it” without perhaps considering that the OTHER sellers of digital music havent sold in a format that can play on iPods. It’s like Apple went out of their way to make the iPod incompatible.
I think not. The iPod supports any non-DRMed MP3 file, of which ive purchased a ton through services that dont put DRM on them. Apple certainly isn’t rigging my iPod to be incompatible with those sites.
Yet another article worthy of “News-weak” magazine.
I have read Insanely Great (even have it at hand since I’m reading it again after just finishing Apple Confidential 2.0).
Great book to be sure, but it doesn’t mean he isn’t wrong on this. The iPod is hands down the best player on the market. To be more correct, the iPod/iTMS model is the best available. If people choose to use this, it is not Apple forcing them to do anything.
It is well within Apple’s rights to keep their technology/software/DRM, etc. to themselves. They own it, they should say what happens to it. I have 5 iPods (no 5G, yet) and I have never had a problem putting whatever I want on them to listen.
Levy wrote a great book, but let’s be honest and consistent. When Enderle says something right, I’m willing to admit it (as rare as it is) and when Levy is wrong, I’m going to call him on it.
I never said he was a basher, just wrong. And yes, if you haven’t read his book, by all means get it.
~M
“Take my word for it, Steve—when people pay for music, they want it to be playable on any device they choose…”
I agree. I’ve been trying for years to get this damned K.C. and the Sunshine Band cassette to play on my CD player, but it doesn’t even fit in the slot!
So, what you’re saying, Levy, is that when people pay for MP3s, they should play on cassette players, and when people pay for vinyl, it should play on an MP3 player, and so on. It’s just not possible to play any paid for music on any device of choice. I challenge you to name for me any format that is universal.
Fred,
What’s he wrong about? He’s complaining about the general trend toward closed, proprietary systems. That’s a valid complaint and he’s entitled to his opinion. There’s nothing “wrong” about what he’s saying at all, even if Apple has valid business reasons for wanting to remain closed and proprietary.
Apple should look at the battle as between AAC and WMA. It should license out FairPlay and make it the standard DRM on an assortment of approved devices — Blu-ray players, home stereo bridges, car stereo systems, more cell phones.
The larger the AAC/FairPlay ecosystem is, the better for Apple.
It’s embarassing to see the unwillingness here to admit that maybe this guy has a point. Wouldn’t it be nice — nothing legal here, but talking convenience and “playing well with others” — if customers who liked a different music player than the iPod could still use iTunes?
What other music stores? As a Mac user, I’m locked out by toxic incompatibilities.
you mindless mac drone idiots would eat your young if they said a precious word against Dear Leader Jobs and Big Apple. Levy is one of your own who is arguing against closed systems, yet here you are gleefully chewing his bones because you perceive a slight against Apple (even tho he is/was a well known mac evangelist defacto).
Stupid mac drones. Get some.
IU have to agree with Heroin on this – Apple has little to loose by licensing AAC encoding to others. So what if someone wants to give iPod compaitble music rental a try? So what if a blogger wants to pay Apple $99 to be able to encode in DRM fairplay and sell their works?
The downside to Apple is that it may put pricing pressure on the iTMS – right now Apple could hike prices and I for one have no recourse because I’m “locked in”. And unless Apple licenses the ability to DECODE fiarplay, no one is toppling iPod off the mountain top.
MDN word: million
Levy’s trolling for attention again. I generally find his writing interesting, but in this case, he’s worked to hard to bait the Mac faithful. Consider the title of the “award” here: “self-serving perpetrators of toxic incompatibilities.” It’s just flame-bait. Sure, he could have also tagged all those other iTMS-wannabes, as well as Microsoft and its silly “Plays-for-Sure.” But he picked on the gorilla in this space, knowing full well it will garner attention.
As for that last anonymous comment, customers who like a different player than an iPod can use iTunes…..just not to as great a depth as owners of iPods can. Where, oh where, is it written than a company–whether it is Apple or AOL–must open its systems to users outside its”ecosystem” on the same level as those who have paid to get inside?
Dear Nameless Coward,
You’re right. We mac drones should get some. We’re just wankers who need girls. Thanks for setting us all straight.
You white trash, inbred, turd munching, sheep f**ker. Be a man. Post a name. Contribute with something meaningful.
I don’t care what he’s talking about, he’s wrong. Apple’s system remains the most “open” that there is out there, so if he wants to complain, he should be complaining about the even more proprietary WMA/Plays For Sure system.
Whether he or anyone else likes it or not, in the end, Apple is a business. If he wants something truly and totally free and open, he needs to look to the open source community (not toward a business like Apple) to provide what he’s asking for.
justified out of his butt wrote:
“challenge you to name for me any format that is universal.
DRM is not a format it is a way to keep data from being read by other players
All LPs were available to being played by other record players
All cassettes could be playe by other manufacturers cassette players
All CD’s can play on other manufactures machines.
have I lost you here bubba?
What part of format do you not understand?
The issue here being that:
ALL digital music should be able to be played on other digital players.
MW = wall as in you should not have banged your head against the wall that often
http://homepage.mac.com/jrobillard/iPodz.mp4
he has a very valid point. i’m tired of buying stuff and having the company i bought it from tell me where and when im supposed to use it. imagine if you bought a cd, and it only worked on kenwood cd players? what right does the cd label have to tell me what i can play it on? comparing car keys is ridiculous. this is a matter of owning what you pay for and using it any damn way you want to, after all you payed for it, right? apple is just trying to keep there dominance in this field, and that is how they do it, bottom line.
there is an increasing trend towards consumers losing there right to choose, and of ownership.
My company is finally upgrading its servers to Exchange 2003, so I will be able to move from the Outlook 2001 client in Classic to MacOS X native Entourage. If I go one step further to MacOS X Mail, will I still be able to use the calendaring feature integrated with Exchange 2003 server? I would love to dump as much M$ baggage as possible, but I have to maintain a seamless calendar interface.
Heroin
I agree with what you are saying here EXCEPT with the poor use of
“ecosystem” – sure Gates used it before to refer to technology but that does not legitimize it. ecosystems has its root in ecology. now here chose how the any computer family fits that your choice word.
e·col·o·gy P Pronunciation Key (-kl-j)
n. pl. e·col·o·gies
The science of the relationships between organisms and their environments. Also called bionomics.
The relationship between organisms and their environment.
The branch of sociology that is concerned with studying the relationships between human groups and their physical and social environments. Also called human ecology.
The study of the detrimental effects of modern civilization on the environment, with a view toward prevention or reversal through conservation. Also called human ecology.
The beginning of wisdom is to call things by the right name
-Einstein
You don’t have to buy music from the iTunes store.
AlanD,
MW = dung, as in; F#&K OFF, you toothless, dung eating, barn dweller.
well done
this is shite toxic news that deserves discrete defacing on the news stand
be fair.. he had to type this article with one hand, so there may be some.. er.. typos..
Oh, it’s not what you think, Levy was counting his MS Payola with his other hand
linguist-
Are you retarded?
Go look it up.
MDN’s wrongness is not new.
– Apple *DOES* force its customers to use iPod and iTunes. If you buy an iPod, you have exactly one option for purchasing content online, and if you use iTunes/iTMS, you have exactly one option for a portable player. They don’t force you into their products, but if you buy one of their products, you have no choices about the rest.
– The analogies of XBOX games on PS or Lexus key in a Honda are flawed. Think instead of your PS only working with your SONY television, or your Lexus only driving on approved highways. Those would be outrageous.
justified
Take it like a man, you were talking crap and aland call you on it. now get out of the gutter and move on. this is just a forum, it happens.
Pale Rider & co:
Microsoft and the others have expressed a willingness to share their standards with Apple. Whatever its reasons may be, Apple’s refusal to make FairPlay encoding or decoding available to others constitutes the self-serving incompatibility. The others are all compatible with each other, and are on the record as willing to be compatible with Apple.
heroin
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
why do I have a feeling that you won’t be using that word again?
Peace man
there is more to the story than just proprietary formats. I am not sure that Apple even has the option to license FairPlay. The content is still the property of the Labels, not Apple. Even if Apple licensed FairPlay to say MP3.COM does that mean that they can sell their content just as Apple does. Each outlet has to license with the content providers. What will be interesting in the coming year I suspect is the Labels will try to extend licensing to WMA outlets to put pressure on Apple because the Labels don’t feel they have enough control over Apple. What Apple should do is find a way to license FairPlay such that other outlets can sell the Labels content using the same format as Apple uses. This will put pressure back on the Labels and remove the label of proprietary from the AAC/Fairplay DRM. No matter what, this is going to be a great show to watch!
“Apple *DOES* force its customers to use iPod and iTunes.”
Utterly ridiculous.
Anyone who’s willing to open their fricking eyes can clearly see that we’re still in the nascent phase of this marketplace. NO company is obligated to provide a “leg up” to their competitors simply for the sake of some “perceived” greater convenience. Especially in the midst of a constantly evolving (and evolving at light speed, no less) market paradigm. Indeed, this is the period in which you establish the solidity of your business model — not risk it all because other companies were too stupid to innovate. Or were unwilling to provide all aspects of the user experience. FSCK THEM!
MDN’s take is CORRECT. Apple has plently of compatibility built-in to their system. After all, it works for PC’s as well. And guess what? The marketplace has ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM with the current state of affairs. Only the whiners do.
Choose another goddamn system if you don’t like being “trapped” — whatever the hell that means.
You know the old saying:
“The don’t try and tackle you unless you’ve got the ball.”
Apple has the ball and just keeps scoring touchdowns. And it’s a great, great thing to see.
Open your eyes, PC Nutjob.
I still disagree with Levy even if he is a Mac booster because right now he is a basher of the best music player and service on the planet. DRM was the record companies idea, not Steve Jobs. Blame them for requiring DRM and incompatabilities not Apple. Imagine a world without DRM and then everyone could sell music for any player. But the record labels are so paranoid and greedy it won’t ever happen. So again don’t blame Apple or Steve Jobs. iTunes has the best DRM and you don’t have to pay a monthly fee and if you decide not to buy from iTunes ever again your music won’t disappear.
dave,
One can make a point without talking down to others. AlanD is clearly a oaf.
“One can make a point without talking down to others.”
You are absolutly right about that. It would be good if Mr D was big enough to apologize.
Why are you people BUYING anything?
All these critics of ‘closed’ systems are missing the real point.
The only thing that really makes them closed is the DRM, but without the DRM, the labels wouldn’t allow their music to be sold digitally. There is no universal DRM system, so nobody can sell universally interoperable digital music.
Whatever the labels may try to claim publicly, they are not in favour of universal digital systems as they fear that it can be too easy to make perfect copies.
Look at Sony’s recent ham-fisted attempt to copy protect it’s CDs. The CD format was designed to be universal, but the people who make them no longer want them to be universal and go out of their way to distribute non-standard CDs.
I aways considered Newsweek a self-serving perpetrator of toxic bias.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”tongue wink” style=”border:0;” />
“Why are you people BUYING anything?”
I wanna be the next Dalai Lama…,
All of these folks forget to mention that quicktime can convert a song downloaded through itunes music store into a format compatible with playforsure MP3 players.
Are there more Mac owners than non-apple portable digital audio player owners. If so then napster is being more incompatible.
Dave
you are right. I shot from the hip frustrated with the diatribe.
Justified. sorry dude did not mean it personally.
Everyone here is making good points, but it seems the tone is generally defensive. I find Levy’s tone to be offensvie and repugnant. Here’s a situation where millions of people are willingly buying iPods and the music to use with it, and this condescending a**hole is telling everyone he’s right and the rest of us are wrong and are so ignorant that we can’t
can’t see through SJ’s bull? Give me a break. To paraphrase an old expression, this guy couldn’t find his chair warmer in a phone booth.
AlanAudio –
There is no universal DRM only because the folks writing the schemes aren’t making them available. It’s a set of 1s and 0s, and all personal computers as well as digital media players of all sorts could use any one of them.
Apple promotes open source initiatives left and right, and criticizes its competitors for not playing nice. But in this situation, where it would clearly serve to create a competitive market, they are unwilling to open their DRM scheme.
Open DRM schemes would allow portable devices to compete on their actual features, rather than on the basis of which stores can provide content for it. They would permit stores to compete on ease of use and pricing rather than on which portables you’re allowed to use with them.
Should Apple require reciprocation? Yes. Other retailers must support the iPod as a portable device. But one side of this equation has agreed to play fair, and one side is sticking to FairPlay. Is it working out financially for them? Yep. To a huge degree. Is it legal? Probably. But something stinks, so it might not be for long.
The last time I checked no one was forced to buy an iPod. No one is screaming at the fact that Napster etc is incompitable with Macs..
my word “clearly” as in you clearly have a choice to use or not to use the iPod.
I don’t have an iPod, but isn’t it possible to rip iTMS songs to CD (somehow undoing DRM, and maybe losing Mhz qualitiy…). Well, anyway, I think once you have it on CD isn’t it possible to load onto a Rio, or any other such device?
Oh, and of course, this iTMS method would work on both PC’s AND Macs. Last I heard it is unique in the marketplace on that score, no?
MDN:
Stop referring to iTunes for Windows and to iPod-PC compatibility as to an evidence of the iTunes/iPod “openness”. We all know that the reason why Apple does that is to reach customers beyond Mac and maybe make them to switch to Mac. And that is it.
Puhleeze. I’m upset the engine in my Lexus won’t go into my old Toyota. I’m upset that I can’t use the motherboard in a quad PowerMac G5 in a Mac mini. I’m upset that I can’t get the ink out of my Pentel pen to use in a less expensive Bic.
Apple ‘forces’ customers? I don’t think so. When you buy an iPod you expect iTunes to be able to put music on it. It does. All that music can go elsewhere. When you buy music from ‘iTunes’ music store, you expect iTunes to be able to play it. It does.
Get another portable music player and it won’t work with iTunes (mostly) or iTunes music store. Is that Apple’s fault or the idiot manufacturer’s fault for trying to compete with God’s will– Apple’s ecosystem?
Where’s all the noise about Sony’s most recent iPod killers not playing nice-nice with ANY friggin’ format on the face of the earth.
Get real. With all the things to complain about, only a Windows-lag would complain about that. BTW – AOL was pumping bits long before the ‘public’ internet, but that’s another story.
Here’s still another: supertime (above) said, “All of these folks forget to mention that quicktime can convert a song downloaded through itunes music store into a format compatible with playforsure MP3 players.”
Exactly how is that accomplished using a Fairplay AAC music file?
Bambi Hambi
Mac360
Forgot to mention, after ‘Insanely Great’ what has happened to Steve Levy’s insight? Seems like he’s lost his way. On this issue at least…must be drinking RIAA KoolAid; thsi is ruining compettition. Or some such propoganda. Choice is best for consumers, etc. (Like they lack choice as it stands, right?) They’re making choices. Just towards onecou provider who seems to have the superior solution.
So I e-mailed him, and this is what I said:
Incompatibilities are insidious and annoying, especially where they are obviously deliberate. Recently I tried to use MSN Messenger for Mac to video chat with a friend who has MSN Messenger for Windows, guess what, they are not compatible! There is really no excuse for that. On the other hand AIM for Mac works with AIM for Windows for video chat and yet you trash AOL.
I realize, for the most part, you were not dealing with cross-platform compatibility, but frankly that is far more important to me than between competing formats. The iTunes Music Store (iTMS) work on both PC and Mac, do ANY of the other services? No! They are ALL Windows only, but that information wasn’t mentioned, was it?
ITunes can import (and iPods can play) a variety of formats including AAC, Protected AAC, MP3, MP3 VBR, Audible (formats 2, 3 and 4), Apple Lossless, WAV, AIFF, and automatically convert unprotected WMA, among other formats. The other Online Services offer protected WMA’s, virtually the ONLY format that doesn’t play on an iPod. So they have imposed a limitation and then blame Apple for that limitation, now tell me this is not a F.U.D. campaign.
But then considering the link what do you expect, how many msn’s do you need in one URL?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10018073/site/newsweek/
To those who like car metaphors:
Would not u be upset if the gas u buy from Shell would only suit GM cars and would not suit Ford and other ones?
Yeah, Apple “rigged” their files to be incompatible with all the other players and music services, that were on the market at the time that they released the iTMS.
By the way, what other players were on the market at that time again? Oh right, no one remembers. Okay, but what legal music download services were online at that time? Oh right, there weren’t any others.
Who’s calling who incompatible?
MW: Himself. This guy is only fooling himself.
“you mindless mac drone idiots would eat your young if they said a precious word against Dear Leader Jobs and Big Apple.”
And tell us again why you are reading this message board if we are such a bunch of idiots?
Did this guy actually do some research before making this Our ‘Can’t We All Just Get Along?’ Awards list.
Microsoft should have gotten the grand prize for enforcing incompatibilities onto the rest of the computing world!
AAC works everywhere, WMA does not!
Compatibility is not the end all be all of everything. iTunes has done a GREAT job of sorting out the mess that was the digital download industry. It created a platform for people to be honest when there was none. It’s not like I can’t go to the store and buy a CD and import into iTunes (I can). It’s not like I can’t burn a CD from another store and import it into iTunes. Granted these are extra steps but you are able to buy from other stores and import into iTunes and the iPod. That’s enough for me.
No one stops anyone from buying one of those other horrible players with horrible software integration. So the monopoly argument is false.
Satellite radio is a whole different story. They are two separate services started privately. There is no obligation for them to be compatible. So far, the market of 7 million combined users has no objection. Compatibility for compatibility’s sake could be expensive for all we know.
The problem with Microsoft in alot of cases is that they’d destroy companies and replace them with inferior products. That was clear abuse of power. Apple, XM, Sirius have exhibited no such behavior.
I may be wrong but is not that true that Microsoft has smth like iTunes Music store and it is called http://music.msn.com/
I am not sure if I can buy music from that store using Windows Media Player for Mac. But if i could 1) why iTunes Music Store is referred to as the only cross platform solution and 2) why would not that be reasonable to allow me to download so purchased music to my iPod?
PS I have never used WMP store and may be missing smth; sorry again
Levy’s comments are no more valid than those of people who complained about the Mac OS not running on PCs. And yes, some people actually complained about that long before Intel Macs were announced or even thought of.
I’ll lay odds that very soon, when the first Intel Macs are released, you’ll hear it a lot more.
And it still won’t be valid.
MDn word: “perhaps” As in “Perhaps some people should get a clue about Apple’s hardware/software harmony.”
Evgeny wrote;
I am not sure if I can buy music from that store using Windows Media Player for Mac… PS I have never used WMP store and may be missing smth; sorry again
Microsoft’s WMA-DRM (hence PlaysForSure) solution only works on Windows, whereas Apple’s FairPlay works on both Mac and Windows. So Apple’s solution is more open than Microsoft’s at the computer platform level, and Microsoft’s solution is more open at the digital music player than Apple’s. Neither solution fully open at both levels. Sun Microsystems is working on an open sourced DRM solution called DReaM that may one day provide an overly seamless multi-platform compatible solution at all levels.
I wonder where Lugz got their idea for there ad from…
http://www.martinfrench.com/
I guess this guy doesn’t believe in the free market or the USA. Apple made the iPod, later made it work for Windows users too, then made an online store to go with it. Now the anti-Apple zealots scream “monopoly! no fair!”. Whatever. The rest of the market should license FairPlay and make their crap work with iPods, if they want to run with the big dogs. Otherwise they can just keep on dropping like flies in Apple’s wake.
PC Apologist
I respect what your saying, but still not buying it. Here in the real world, you buy an iPod, you use iTunes. That simple. If you don’t want to be “locked-in” then don’t by an iPod. That simple.
Whatever one is saying is that everything must be compatible. That’s just crazy talk. For the car thing to work it would go more like this: Some of my Ford parts don’t fit with my Chevy! WHY? Well, because Ford wants you to buy Ford products forever… simple. Same goes for Microsoft, Apple and ever other company out there.
I don’t want my OS X on a Dell. I don’t want my Apple laptop running Windows. I don’t want to buy a “cheaper” version of the iPod to use iTunes. I, and it seems there are a lot of me out there, don’t want this. So what’s the big deal.
If anything, nothing is compatible. Oh, something, but not ever thing will work with everything, if that was the case, then life would be just boring.
Oh, just a thought about the grand a great compatible Microsoft, why not a Windows for my Apple hardware? See, they too are incompatible.
nuff said.
Apple is just complying with the terms of their agreements with RIAA members to keep the music “secure.” Levy’s piece is weak and not well thought out, so he’s getting a well deserved skewering here.
first, “Job” created itunes. I burned by CDs to it and created a library. I used it and it was good.
second, “Job” created ipod. I downloaded by my burned CDs from my library to it and listened. I used it and it was good.
third, “Job” created itunes store. I bought music. Downloaded music to my library to listen. I could also download to my ipod. I could burn this music to a CD. I used it and it was good.
…now what was the problem again?
Alan D wrote, “ALL digital music should be able to be played on other digital players.”
You’re right, I should be able to stick my CDs in my iPod and play them without any format change. I mean, after all, they are digital music.
First of all, iTunes Music Stores files can be burned on a CD and they can also be played on Macs and PCs so it is not true that they are just for iPods.
Second, how many of these other music stores sell files that are playable on a Mac? It is easy to point a finger at Apple and criticize them for not having an open music player but the fact is, incompatibilities with Microsoft-related products is something Mac users have dealt with for years.
AlanD wrote:
justified out of his butt wrote:
“challenge you to name for me any format that is universal.
DRM is not a format it is a way to keep data from being read by other players
All LPs were available to being played by other record players
All cassettes could be playe by other manufacturers cassette players
All CD’s can play on other manufactures machines.
have I lost you here bubba?
What part of format do you not understand?
The issue here being that:
ALL digital music should be able to be played on other digital players.
——
Actually, you’ve still missed the point because you’re not looking at it from far enough back.
Here are two things that might help: (1) those same formats don’t really play on all other players, and (2) buying a license to music once does not entitle someone a free copy in a new format.
The first point is to realize we really are talking about incompatible formats with respect to the examples of cassettes not playing in CD players, and even CDs not playing in DVD players even though they look similar. (A DVD player has to also include the mechanism for reading a CD to have that ability.)
Also, consider not all record players could play all records because some needed to be played at different speeds. Some tape cassettes are smaller than other tape cassettes and won’t play in the same device. Not to mention the differences with DVD-ROM, DVD+R, etc. So, you’re broad statement that a format is supported by all other devices for that type of format doesn’t hold. There are variations and no device is universal without having to add yet another module (or device) that will play the new variation, hence why stereo systems have a record player, cassette player, CD player, etc. usually as modules so you can add what you need or want.
The second point is realizing your purchase of the 8-track copy of an album doesn’t mean you won’t have to buy the cassette or CD. It won’t be provided free of charge. You’ll either have to buy the album again on the other formats (vinyl, cassette, CD, MP3, AIFF, WAV, etc.) or convert it yourself (though that might not be permitted by the artist’s license of your copy).
This isn’t anything new. Windows XP programs don’t work on Mac OS X and vice versa. You have to have another module to run those programs, hence in this case a second computer or emulation software.
More examples: some vehicles run on unleaded gasoline and others on diesel so not all vehicles are the same; not all movies are filmed in the same height/width ratio so even a wide-screen TV will still have black bars at the top and bottom.
So, anyways, I’m just pointing out that you’re missing the big picture and aren’t realizing how incompatible the world really is. It’s nothing new and as long as there is somebody who thinks the same thing can be done in different way (e.g. new DVD formats Blue-Ray and HD-DVD) there will be incompatibilities and you will have to choose one or the other or both. Or even none of the above.
Appel is evil! EVIL!
MDW: Theory as-in “That’s my theory and I’m sticking too it”
Music is available from other sources and you can import it into iPods, why in the hell do need to use iTunes. No one is forcing you with a gun. Just blame Apple with everything they do. Can you run WindowsXP on a SUN. NO you can’t. That’s not fair, cry cry cry.
It called free enterprise and companies should have a right to manufacture products that add-ons only fits with theirs product. There are dozens of companies that make players and other choices of places to download from. Simple as that.
Lexmark, Epson, H-P, Canon and others make printers that require EXPENSIVE cartridges only available from the OEM. H-P has even sued 3rd parties that offered lower priced ink cartridges that fit their products. If you don’t want to buy H-P ink cartridges don’t buy their printer. It’s the same business model. Where is the whining about getting ripped off for a couple of ounces of ink? I don’t see websites, petitions, posters and such about the fact that H-P makes more money from selling ink than PCs or printers.
The last time I checked you can still buy music on CDs and rip them to MP3 and play them on ANY digital music player you choose– including the iPod. The DRM is the price of entry into the music store. If you don’t like the terms of sale DON’T USE IT. Nobody is twisting anyone’s arm.
Lexmark, Epson, H-P, Canon and others make printers that require EXPENSIVE cartridges only available from the OEM. H-P has even sued 3rd parties that offered lower priced ink cartridges that fit their products. If you don’t want to buy H-P ink cartridges don’t buy their printer. It’s the same business model. Where is the whining about getting ripped off for a couple of ounces of ink? I don’t see websites, petitions, posters and such about the fact that H-P makes more money from selling ink than PCs or printers.
The last time I checked you can still buy music on CDs and rip them to MP3 and play them on ANY digital music player you choose– including the iPod. The DRM is the price of entry into the music store. If you don’t like the terms of sale DON’T USE IT. Nobody is twisting anyone’s arm.
Lexmark, Epson, H-P, Canon and others make printers that require EXPENSIVE cartridges only available from the OEM. H-P has even sued 3rd parties that offered lower priced ink cartridges that fit their products. If you don’t want to buy H-P ink cartridges don’t buy their printer. It’s the same business model. Where is the whining about getting ripped off for a couple of ounces of ink? I don’t see websites, petitions, posters and such about the fact that H-P makes more money from selling ink than PCs or printers.
The last time I checked you can still buy music on CDs and rip them to MP3 and play them on ANY digital music player you choose– including the iPod. The DRM is the price of entry into the music store. If you don’t like the terms of sale DON’T USE IT. Nobody is twisting anyone’s arm.
Lexmark, Epson, H-P, Canon and others make printers that require EXPENSIVE cartridges only available from the OEM. H-P has even sued 3rd parties that offered lower priced ink cartridges that fit their products. If you don’t want to buy H-P ink cartridges don’t buy their printer. It’s the same business model. Where is the whining about getting ripped off for a couple of ounces of ink? I don’t see websites, petitions, posters and such about the fact that H-P makes more money from selling ink than PCs or printers.
The last time I checked you can still buy music on CDs and rip them to MP3 and play them on ANY digital music player you choose– including the iPod. The DRM is the price of entry into the music store. If you don’t like the terms of sale DON’T USE IT. Nobody is twisting anyone’s arm.
“Consumers are choosing to do so of their own free will. In droves.”
Any reason why that does not apply in this case?:
Apple, 5%
PC’s, the rest.
Jimy
We are talking digits ( bits of info) here dude, not what they are encased in, get it?
now put your tongue back or god will punish and it will stay like that.
Jimmy,
I should be able to put a memory stick into a canon camera
You can make a -1 to 1 not compressed- CD from the iTMS songs put them in any player and/or make a mp3 out of it .
The author is right, DRM that limits the playback device to one manufacturer is wrong.
However the bit I take issue with is “AOL Instant Messenger (AIM) as a closed system.” Doh¡¡
What are apple supposed to do? Just give up and pay for wma DRM and give up a massively larger market share in the process just because it’s microsoft? Or maybe they should license their technology and then potentially shoot themselves in the foot by losing music sales and then potentially hardware sales?
The problem is firstly that we “need” DRM in the first place but secondly that the content providers (the record companies) haven’t taken it upon themselves to sort the situation out before the market grew so big, instead they’ve done a vhs/betamax by allowing multiple DRM’s but on a vastly larger scale. As it stands betamax is currently winning this time though.
forget everything, the proof is there for everyone to see.
I spent the day in the city(Melbourne Australia) today for the first time in ages. Took the train in and waited an hour to get picked up on a main street.
On the way to, during, waiting to get picked up and on the way hom ei saw 147 white ear buds/ipods (this was the most by a long way). Almost all other headphones were connected to phones. The rest were MD’s or some generic types.
mdn:again, as in i’m sure i’ll see this again tomorrow
Well here’s something weird: his number one prize. AOL’s AIM is not a closed system. It works with iChat on the Mac. MSN doesn’t work with iChat; why not? MSN doesn’t work with AIM and AIM doesn’t work with MSN. Which one is the closed system? Which system is refusing to work with the other? Clearly MSN deserves equal recognition if this IM incompatibility issue is truly worthy of being the number 1 problem.
2nd prize: who cares if iPod won’t play music from stores that won’t even sell me music because I’m a mac user? Besides, it’s the label’s fault for insisting on unnecessary DRM in the first place. That’s the real tragedy: that things are no longer truly owned but only licensed to us with restrictions.
3rd prize: who cares if the 2 satellite radio systems are incompatible? You buy one and it works. What’s so bad about that?
Why not focus on incompatibilities that really are a problem? Like cell phone systems, M$ creating incompatible proprietary movie formats that can’t be played on my Mac, printer cartridges that I can only get from one manufacturer who discontinues them when they want you to upgrade.
This guy describes nothing new. Companies have been selling closed, proprietary systems to poeple for years.
It doesn’t mean it’s necessarily right, but companies sell it because it works. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it. It’s the way capitalism works.
Plenty of companies have attempted to create proprietary formats that only play on their own hardware. Most of them have ultimately failed or remained fairly obscure (see “Betamax” and “MiniDisk”).
Others have found their niche in high-end professional applications, and so are less subject to market pressures and competition (see “Betacam”, Photoshop’s “.psd” files, Avid).
And some have been quite successful because they bring enough function and ease of use to the table that consumers are willing to deal with the restrictions. The formats don’t work *everywhere*, but they do work *enough* places that it doesn’t matter (Examples: Microsoft’s .doc format and now Apple’s Protected AAC).
Lots of people try to put the iPod and the iTMS into a box by comparing them to pre-existing business models (the razor/blade model is a popular example), and then try to use that logic to predict Apple’s ultimate failure in the field. They say things like “Company X tried the same thing with product Y, and it was a disaster!” But it never is the “same thing”, not really. We’re dealing with a new industry and a new industry leader. Comparisons can be useful, but only if they are specific and well-considered.
All that said, the original article is an opinion piece that isn’t factually wrong. Levy doesn’t like the restrictions on the Apple Protected AAC format. More power to him. If he prefers the restrictions on WMA music players, he’ll buy those. Or maybe he’s predicting that things will open up in the future, and until then he’s just biding his time and buying CDs. In the end, who really cares? As long as he’s telling the truth and not presenting the article as balanced journalism, give the guy a break.
surprisingly, nobody has mentioned cell phones and cell phone networks. talk about incompatability!!
Evgeny, I would be upset if one petrol wouldn’t work in my car but another would. However I don’t expect to be able to use diesel in my non-diesel engine either.
Can we just remember it was Gates and MS who rejected the open source MPEG/AAC roadmap years ago they wanted a format that they could control so to criticise Apple now is just plain pathetic. If they had gone the open route, if their brown nosing hanger on ‘partners’ had done the same if they had shown any interest in AAC if they had all got together to form a unified DRM standard (just as Video based companies are striving to do for their media independant of MS the monopalist) then maybe they would have a point. As they didn’t then is is right for Apple to decide if and when to open things up after all by giving out the secret of their code they make policing it much more difficult and expensive. I hope that they will see good business reasons to open it up eventually and do so when competitors agree to open up their wares to mac users, which none of them cared a fig about when they thought they would win and probably put the mac out of business in so doing. I hope apple does so because it will be to their advantage and makes good business sense but till then more power to their elbow.
As we see from recent events with Real even apparent enemies of MS one moment are their patsies the next. When this world, governed by an unreformed monopolist changes that will be the right time unfortunately the American Govt decided against forcing that concept througha few years ago.
should win all 3 awards. And THEY are the reason Apple is so careful with their systems. Otherwise they would just be giving their business away to inferior Microsoft products. They would be rolling over for the monopoly.