HP Licenses Apple's iPod & iTMS

grouchomarxist writes "According to the press release here and this article at Forbes HP is licensing Apple's iPod technology for its own MP3 player and use the iTunes Music Store. 'HP and Apple today announced a strategic alliance to deliver an HP-branded digital music player based on Apple's iPod, the number one digital music player in the world, and Apple's award-winning iTunes digital music jukebox and pioneering online music store to HP's customers.'"

Comments

Dear Apple: why?

[mandalayx]

From Apple's point of view, I'm not sure what they gain.

Sure, you get a desktop audience of new HP computers. And that's significant, because many newbies will only get to what's pre-installed and use that (cough*IE*cough). But is that really enough to justify diluting your brand? I can forsee the HP version of the iPod sucking.

But hey, I could be wrong, and we could all be getting $99 hPods next December. And we'll all be happy, right?

PS - Did anyone notice that HPShopping.com's CEO is named Appl? No joke.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[OmniVector]

apple stands to gain a LOT from this. HP alone probably ships more machines a year than apple, so that's already doubling the distribution of iTunes for them. iTunes really is the key to this one. iTunes introduces them to iPods and iTMS

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[badasscat]

"But hey, I could be wrong, and we could all be getting $99 hPods next December. "

It seems obvious that part of the licensing deal would stipulate that HP cannot undercut Apple's pricing. I would be shocked to see any HP models with anything but the same capacities as Apple's at the same prices. And if anything, they'll be physically bigger, or won't look as nice. Apple's going to keep the high ground somehow.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[GabeK]

Apple will certainly benefit from this... Many people that aren't "in the know" would write off the iPod as an Apple product that isn't compatible with the PC. Now they get to position their product to another group of people. Let's not forget about the old-timers ("bah, HP's been around longer than Apple, so the HP product must be better!"). They'll be transformed, too.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[rsborg]

From Apple's point of view, I'm not sure what they gain.

Perhaps, given the recent push for cheaper (YMMV) iPods, and this announcement, that Apple has decided to ditch the "iTunes is a loss leader for iPods" approach?

Perhaps the content providers are ready to throw their all their eggs into the iTunes basket...

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[frodo from middle ea]

Also don't forget that HP is a much bigger international company than Apple will ever be.

HP printers, desktops etc. are already popular in asian countries and apple, has a better chance of tapping in to these markets, using HP's help than on its own.

Of course this goes only for the iPod or hPod , as itunes currently works only for US customers.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[jest3r]

Apple needs to get iTunes onto the Windows desktop by default .. otherwise M$ will be able to pull a Netscape manouver pretty easily. I am sure Apple will be able to use this as leverage to negotiate better deals with the Record Labels down the road.

Hardware-wise maybe HPiPods will introduce a little competition and make Apple rethink the pricing on the mini iPods ..

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[happyfrogcow]

well if competition drops the iPod price, then Apple has jumped the gun and gets royalties, license fees, or whatever, which might exceed what which they would expect to make off sales of iPod at the lower cost which competition will force.

holy run-on batman. did any of that make sense? what i think i'm trying to say is that Apple expects the price of iPods to go down sometime soon. While they are a hot commodity, they license the technology at a very good price for themselves. the competing products will both be less expensive, and sales matter less to Apple now, since they get a peice of the competitions pie anyway.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[SweetAndSourJesus]

I can forsee the HP version of the iPod sucking.

It's the same hardware in "HP blue."

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[greenskyx]

"From Apple's point of view, I'm not sure what they gain." Because they are getting money through licensing the technology. This is EXACTLY what they should have done with the MacOS back in the 80's. I bet deals like this could cement iTunes as the premier online music store platform.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[GabeK]

Apple will certainly benefit from this... Many people that aren't "in the know" would write off the iPod as an Apple product that isn't compatible with the PC. Now they get to position their product to another group of people. Let's not forget about the old-timers ("bah, HP's been around longer than Apple, so the HP product must be better!"). They'll be transformed, too.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[gid13]

Um... Could it be cash? What else would "HP Licenses Apple's iPod & iTMS" mean?

I find it funny that capitalism has progressed far enough that people always talk about brand recognition and publicity and things like that as the end goals. It seems to me that when a company is directly receiving cash they're skipping the middlemen.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[larry bagina]

Macintosh is very popular in Japan. Probably because they supported Kanji back in the 1980s, but also their technology culture fits in with Macintosh better than Wintel.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

yeh meshes with their culture alright...

not a damn one can code.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[amnesiacdotorg]

at $0.99 a track, after the credit card companies and the record industry receive their cut, let's be honest, the iTMS isn't exactly yielding huge dividends on its own merits .

the ipod/itunes combination is the horizontal monopoly apple attempting to cut the legs out from underneath the vertical monopoly microsoft with an intellectual attack . the kind of choice apple offers is, "do what you will with your hardware, but do it legitimately and legally." microsoft's model of a free-for-all as long as you're not stealing our applications will not stand the intellectual property war that has descended on the business world .

corporations want their patents and property protected . apple will allow them to do so .

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[sql*kitten]

It seems obvious that part of the licensing deal would stipulate that HP cannot undercut Apple's pricing.

It's not obvious at all. Remember HP and Apple have radically different business models. HP is all about commodity and volume and price competition. Apple's model is "if it's cool enough, we can charge what we like, even if it means our volume is lower".

And if anything, they'll be physically bigger, or won't look as nice. Apple's going to keep the high ground somehow.

Indeed. This is potentially a win-win, since the two companies are strong in different markets.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[jitenpai]

I was thinking about this... "is Apple going to make the same mistake with iPods as they did with their desktops way back then?"

Then this news breaks, and I am happy that there will be some decent competition to the big M$/Dell push that's beginning to shape up this year.

So, the hope is that this licensing partnership will bring down the prices.

If Apple changes the "coolness factor" or in any way makes the HP ones less appealing (price-wise, capacity-wise, etc) then the marketing folks at Apple have most definitely had a full frontal lobotomy.

If this is the case, then iPods will go the same way as Macs have - fantastic, innovative (where have I heard that before?), but with a small select user base.

But the fact remains that Apple is trying to make up for some of the costs of iTunes via the sales of iPods... tsk tsk what a mess!

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Kuroshin, what is that all about?

Is it good, or is it whack?

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[glenrm]

But with DRM MSFT will be protecting other people intellectual property as well so...

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[ceejayoz]

In addition, HP will start preinstalling Apple's iTunes on its consumer PCs and desktops. HP previously said it planned to enter the digital music player and music store business, though sources familiar with the company's plans said partners would likely be involved.

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5137473.html?tag= zdfd.newsfeed

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[noewun]

But the fact remains that Apple is trying to make up for some of the costs of iTunes via the sales of iPods... tsk tsk what a mess!

Huh?

Apple has been upfront all along -- the iTMS is either a loss leader or barely breaks even and exists largely to move iPods and Macs. Your statement makes no sense.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Llywelyn]

>Of course this goes only for the iPod or hPod , as itunes
>currently works only for US customers.

Minor correction, the iTunes MUSIC STORE only works for US customers. The software (the ripper/burner/player) works fine outside of the US.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Golias]

Really? I thought HP's model was "buy Compaq and form as many press-grabbing strategic partnerships as possible, so Carly Fiorina and her friends can pump & dump the stock."

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[amnesiacdotorg]

really .

how long do you think it'll be before some 18 year old locked in a dark closet with some dev tools pulls another drm shattering job . digital degradation from one analog generation is barely noticeable, and jobs has said it a million times, it's not that difficult to record analog from your cd player . people will find a way to defeat technology, the true way is to teach people that theft is wrong .

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

if you cant beat them, join them

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[FatRatBastard]

From Apple's point of view, I'm not sure what they gain.

Mindshare and marketshare, not to mention money. If you want clout with component manufacturers on the hardware side and the Big 5 (soon to be Big 4) on the content side you have to be a volume leader. So lets see what happens if Apple told HP to go fly a kite.

HP comes up with their own player and service (or, more likely license someone else's) that would be .wma based (with respect to purchased music), and while it may not be the greatest bit of kit, nor the greatest service HP will sell enough of them with system bundles / special deals / etc. (and even if the content side of the equation blows a user would have the option to use any other .wma based content service, like BuyMusic.com, Music.Walmart.com, etc.)

Instead, cut a deal with HP (since they seem to love the iPod and iTunes) and you may lose some money on a per-unit basis, but you are further cementing the AAC format, increasing the volume of the iTunes store, and increasing the volume of equipment that you're buying from hardware suppliers, the latter two allowing you further leverage to bring down costs and/or increase profit margins.

Apple needs to continue to hold a large share of the music d/l market. Let, ahem, others grab too controling a share of the codec pie and they'll use that leverage to lock everyone else out.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Andy Davies]

Perhaps Jobs has been reading FastCompany.

Current issue has an article on Apple and how they've screwed up in the past by trying to do everything themselves instead of licensing to others.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

From the article...

"In addition, HP will start preinstalling Apple's iTunes on its consumer PCs and desktops."

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Gizzmonic]

Touche! Back to your corners, ladies and gentlemen!

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

I asked the question of when iTunes was being introduced at a careers talk by Universal Music here at Uni, and the guy heading the talk said that it was being planned to be rolled out towards March/April time here in the UK, and I am assuming Europe. Just thought ppl here would be interested.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Frymaster]

Apple's going to keep the high ground somehow

you know that staking out the high end for apple has to be in the agreement somewhere.

apple learned this lesson the hard way six or seven years ago with the whole "macsimilie" fiasco. basically, apple licensed the spec and the os and the firmware to make mac clones to a bunch of companies to try and reposition themselves as a software company (rather than a hardware company, which they are and always will be)

the result was that companies like powercomputing and umax gunned for the fat-margin at the top end and beat apple at their own game. apple nearly went bankrupt, yanked the deal with os 8, changed ceo's and had to kow tow to msft for a $150mil in emergency cash to avoid the chapter-11 reaper.

steve knows this history well (since he was the replacement ceo). he won't let it happen again, believe me.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[jeffehobbs]

the iTMS is either a loss leader or barely breaks even

That's only true at the current economy of scale; if they crank up the units (songs) sold, the capacity for profit is much, much greater. Making deals with other companies will increase the number of iTunes customers.

~jeff

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

NeXT is doing pretty well, I think.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

The iTunes contract with HP is exclusive so there won't be other companies bundling it

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[JonathanBoyd]

the result was that companies like powercomputing and umax gunned for the fat-margin at the top end and beat apple at their own game. apple nearly went bankrupt, yanked the deal with os 8, changed ceo's and had to kow tow to msft for a $150mil in emergency cash to avoid the chapter-11 reaper.

The clones were causing problems, but were far from being the sole reason for the cries of 'Apple is dying!' They were quite a while away from bankruptcy as well. The $150 million certainly didn't save them. It was a token gesture that was totally unnecessary for financial health. They still had billions in the bank.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Golias]

Actually, the $150 Million from MS was a drop in the bucket. Apple had $400 Million in liquid currency sitting around at the time of the deal. What they got out of it was shiny new versions of Office and IE, a MS development team working full-time in Cupertino on Apple solutions, and a lot of good press assuring people that Apple was not going away any time soon.

The part that almost never gets reported was that part of the deal was an "undisclosed" money transfer as an informal settlement for all the technologies that MS stole from Apple over the years, as well as an agreement that would allow MS to buy future Apple developments. (This has a lot to do with why XP looks so much like a Macintosh OS in some ways.)

What MS got out of it was an end to their legal wranglings with Apple, a weakening of the case that MS held a monopoly on computer operating systems, and the ability to legally use Apple as a sort of out-sourced R&D department.

The real winners in the deal were us. As consumers, we got to see systems from both Apple and the PC world get much, much better over the last three years.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

"I can forsee the HP version of the iPod sucking."

If by sucking, you mean supporting WMA and OGG, and lower cost. Then I'm all for it.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[nelsonal]

They will probably make the same profit (or close to it) on each iPod that HP sells since they will likely collect a fee for using the brand name design spec and let HP keep most of the volume gains (ordering parts and better distribution). iTunes will likely continue to be a close to breakeven service.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Aqua OS X]

Apple's going to get licensing fees, the music store's going to get more popular, and we might actually get to see some players that are affordable :)

Looks good :)

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[FatRatBastard]

Agreed.. I ment to say "they'll lose a some profit on each sale..." I think they'll still make money on the hardware side of things, just maybe not as much per iPod than when they sell it themselves.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

This ain't hardware.

Their incremental cost per song is not likely to change very much, if at all, even at 100x the economy of scale.

ITMS is a break-even proposition... for Apple. If all music in the world were being sold via ITMS, Apple would still be roughly breaking even. Most of that 99c goes to the RIAA. Of the rest of it, most of it goes to bandwidth and infrastructure costs.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

apple stands to gain a LOT from this. HP alone probably ships more machines a year than apple, so that's already doubling the distribution of iTunes for them.

Hell, HP probably ships 20 times more machines than Apple does.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[bonzomcgrue]

>> From Apple's point of view, I'm not sure what they gain.

You're kidding, right?

There's a standards war going on. In three years, do you want to be listening to MP3, WMA, Ogg, or AAC?

Apple wants you to listen to AAC. HP can introduce this format to millions of customers. That's one of the things that Apple gains.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Pieroxy]

steve knows this history [...] he won't let it happen again

Little have you learned about the history of humanity. You should have said:

steve knows this history [...] he won't let it happen again anytime soon

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Dot.Zeile]

Apple will be able to sell iPods via HP's channel, under HP logo. Then they can avoid being sued by Apple Records.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Selecter]

The article I read directly said that the device would be made by Apple in reb-badged form which will be a *actual* iPod that simply has a HP logo on it. In other words, it *is* a real iPod.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[GnomeAttic]

Lets call them HiPods instead of hPods, its much easier to say.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[four2five]

If you watch Dell's website, when they are selling the iPod, you can often find the 40GB, $499 retail, for anywhere from $420 - $475 depending on what coupons they have active at that point. Here we see Dell selling the exact same product for considerablly less. Able's still turning some profit and they're getting more numbers out the door. At this stage in the mp3 player market it's big to have recognition and get your product out there. What people start with and what they're comfortable with is usually what they'll stick with. It worked for M$, why not Apple's iPod?

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Selecter]

FRB is right on the money. The BIG news in this is that it's a codec war now, AAC vs. WMA. Whoever wins the battle of the codecs wins supremacy of the music market for PC's and the things that plug into them for years.

Apple is ahead, and with more moves like this, will stay that way. Bill Gates shit his pants today. He just plain lost.

it seems Jobs has learned something from the operating system war of the late 80's/early 90's. Apple and Hp's stock both went up like crazy today.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Rasta Prefect]

at $0.99 a track, after the credit card companies and the record industry receive their cut, let's be honest, the iTMS isn't exactly yielding huge dividends on its own merits

Actually, I believe it's been previously reported here that _all_ of the money is handed over to ther record companies. It's just a gimmick to sell iPods...

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Spyky]

Also, this deal is announced for this summer. By then the iTunes Music Store may be international.

-Spyky

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[OS24Ever]

Or, you tell HP 'hey, here's something that you can sell that will add a single option at over 30% margin while you compete with a cut rate competitor like Dell who makes you loose money on every sale. This thing is so popular it could bring more money in for your desktop market because people will buy them both'

Remeber this is HP, not Dell. HP isn't about dropping their drawers and forcing their vendors to sell things cheap or fast. I don't expect a $99 HPod next year unless Apple makes one first.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Spyky]

No, not *all* of the money is handed over to the record companies, it is not *profitable*, which is different. That means that their hosting/development/advertising costs eat up more than the remaining share, after the record companies get theirs.

As apple sells more and more music, they are approaching profitability, because the cost of development is spread out more. Whether that will ever be enough to actually be truly profitable is another question all together

-Spyky

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

itunes currently works only for US customers.

The iTunes Music Store only works for US customers. iTunes and the iPod work find worldwide.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

wouldn't mind pumping and dumping carly...he he he

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[dgatwood]

Sure it does. The cost of iTMS likely includes:

1. Money paid to record company (scales linearly w/ volume)
2. Credit card transaction fees (varies, but semi-linear)
3. Bandwidth (should get cheaper in bulk, but not a lot)
4. Page design team (fixed cost)
5. QA/Song Import team (fixed cost)
6. iTunes development team (fixed cost)
7. QuickTime development team (fixed cost)
8. Equipment/maintenance (scales mostly by # songs avail.)
9. Legal team (roughly fixed cost)
10. Advertising (roughly fixed cost)

As you can see, there are a lot of very obvious fixed costs. :-) That having been said, I couldn't even begin to guess numbers. Sorry.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[AHumbleOpinion]

But is that really enough to justify diluting your brand? I can forsee the HP version of the iPod sucking.

I doubt they are diluting their brand. If it says "iPod" on the case Apple will most likely have design input. If no Apple trademarks are used, and it sucks, so what. That's HPs problem. If its good and sells, so what, Apple is competing against themselves to a degree, Far better off than if HP went elsewhere for an MP3 player.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[chia_monkey]

Why? Because Apple gets one of the largest computer makers to pre-install one of their apps on their computer. iTunes is wildly successful from people downloading it. Now just imagine Joe Shmoe who isn't a Mac follower or even a computing enthusiast who knows there are non-MS options out there discovers this "cool iTunes thing". It's huge. Hopefully some day Apple will be able to get a little more money for each song that is downloaded, but for now the market penetration of iTunes and the increased exposure of Apple is enough.

And then you've got the iPod deal. Again...huge. First Apple gets revenue from the licensing deal. Then they again reap the benefits of more exposure. Apple already commands a 31% market share with iPod as it is. With HP selling the wares, it's gonna be huge, and I believe the iPod has one of (if the THE) largest profit margins. So again, they get money from the sales, more exposure, and more non-Mac people going "I just got this at the HP store and it rocks".

Those are only two reasons why. I'm sure there's more that will come to me when it fully sinks in. Like how Apple is solidifying its lead with iTunes Music Service and iPod and will thus drive out the copycat services (which in my opinion really blow), will perhaps have other companies clamoring to jump on board and take advantage of Apple's R&D and amazing design, and so forth. Let's not forget, Apple has iTunes in all sorts of deals now...AOL, Pepsi, now HP. They've got something here. Something big.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

"In addition, HP will start preinstalling Apple's iTunes on its consumer PCs and desktops."

Bye bye MusicMatch!

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Queer Boy]

HP alone probably ships more machines a year than apple, so that's already doubling the distribution of iTunes for them.

Actually they don't. Only Compaq and Dell ship more, sometimes only Dell. It just means Apple can sell more iPods that they don't have to support.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait... I thought "exclusive" meant that HP won't be shipping any iTunes alternative on their consumer PCs.

You're saying that it means Apple won't be providing iTunes and the iTMS to ship on any of HP's competitors' boxes? Are you sure?

That seems like a LOT for Apple to give up.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

I want to be listening MPEG-4 AAC. Because it's international industry standard, and better than MP3.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

I like the suggestion (saw it somewhere here) of pronouncing "HPiPods" as "hippy pods". It sounds groovy, man.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[mixmasta]

Maybe you missed the HP/Compaq merger a year or two ago?

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Queer Boy]

There's no mention of Compaq machines in the article, and HP still segregates the HP and Compaq lines. You cannot buy an HPQ computer, only an HP or a Compaq. It also states HP customers, not HPQ customers.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[jht]

HP only uses Compaq now as a consumer-level brand. There _is_ no Compaq anymore, just Compaq computers you can buy at retailers.

All the major Compaq business and high-end brands (like Proliants and iPaqs) are now HP-labeled. There is no HPQ brand, nor will there be - eventually, the Compaq label will likely wither away and die. It's likely that this deal extends to HP and Compaq-labeled equipment.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember what happened when Apple licensed Macs?
Initially the clones took marketshare from Apple (which is expected - they can't magically take marketshare from PCs overnight). So Apple bought back all the licenses.

It's going to happen here. Initially some ppl will buy HP instead of iPod, Apple will cry, and cut the license.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[HaggiZ]

I can see the potential for Apple to almost virally distribute the iPod via HP, giving them a much much larger audience than they can ever hope to achieve on their own.

As most previous generation iPod owners will attest, they usually tend to upgrade with each new generation. If that trend continues with the HP user base then even better for Apple without diluting their branding so much.

Installing iTunes on my windows machine alone almost made me want to go and buy and iPod. It was a very simple and elegant interface, and I wondered why I'd tolerated various other programs for so long. Watching how my colleagues use their iPods as removable hard drives, media readers for their digital cameras, stereo for their cars, and of course as a walkman type device only makes me desire one even more.

If apple can pull such beautiful integration with other products (I'm thinking along the lines of cheap low spec and slim iMacs in a few key locations throughout the household serving as media hubs, using xGrid to share the load) then the iPod is a fantastic way of getting that foot in the door and making the customer believe there is a need for their other products.

Just a thought though

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Refrag]

The $150 million certainly didn't save them. It was a token gesture that was totally unnecessary for financial health.

It was part of a settlement from a lawsuit Apple filed against Microsoft.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[nzkoz]

Yes it does, however the software is kinda useless without the Music Store. Cdex for the ripping and winamp for the playing. Without downloading music there's really no reason to lock all my Mp3s away in the itunes database.

I'm an iPod owner but iTunes sucked compared to ephpod.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Zirtix]

theft is wrong

But copyright violation is right!

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[John Newman]

[nitpick]
I think your axes are mixed up.

Apple is the vertical monopoly, since it controls a music store, a music application, a music player, and a computer that links them all. Microsoft is the horizontal monopoly, since they control all of Windows, but not any store (below) or any players (above).

Horizontal monopolies are usually illegal, since the company completely controls one market and can easily abuse that power. Vertical monopolies are not, since the company doesn't control any particular market and thus has no power over them.
[/nitpick]

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[mabhatter654]

not really, because MS controlls the license for the wma formats and other software in the players, and controls the server OS and server-side program licenses on that end. They have been heavily fighting to lock out other vendors fairly sucessfully. That's why MS has always "flown under the radar" of the anti-trust hounds...but the market itself has figured it out. realize that there is only Apple, MS, and real in this market...everybody else are just proxy manufactures.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[mabhatter654]

Actually this mirrors MS early software programs...in the early days of visual basic and Visual C++ as well as Mac Word, Excell, etc. MS really had the great tools...much like Apple does now...then they got greedy. MS problem is that they made their money playing the IP "middleman" pitting hardware makers like Intel & AMD against eachother as well as IBM, Compaq, & Dells of the world...they made their money by stiring the pot so that the MS solution was the only one gauranteed to work! Smart move, except that everyone is wise to them now...so now they want to have Apple's kind of control. to slashdotters it's old news, but the industry giants are rapidly seeing it so MS can't just make moves like apple without validating what the Linux crowd has been saying for years about open software...once MS gets locked hardware though....

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[estate]

Apple gains a lot from the agreement with HP. According to CBS Marketwatch (see
http://tinyurl.com/2yqf4) Phil Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of worldwide product marketing is reported to have said that "the multi-year exclusive deal has Apple building the players with the H-P name and in colors that are more familiar to H-P's product line".

Since Apple is building the HP iPods, it will benefit from the economies of scale in producing the additional units. This in turn will result in either lower prices down the road (consumers benefit) or better margins for Apple or some combination of both.

And the HP version of the iPod will not suck, since it is essentially a re-badged iPod.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[mallie_mcg]

Actually, the $150 Million from MS was a drop in the bucket. Apple had $400 Million in liquid currency sitting around at the time of the deal. What they got out of it was shiny new versions of Office and IE, a MS development team working full-time in Cupertino on Apple solutions, and a lot of good press assuring people that Apple was not going away any time soon.

you are out by a factor of 10. (4000 million == 4 billion)!

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Redundant offtopic t]

I don't understand what you mean by mp3s being locked away in the itunes database. The files remain untouched either in a directory hierarchy by artist and album, or at your option, where ever you had them before loading them into itunes.

being regular mp3 files, they retain id3 tags and album art. Nothing is locked away except the itunes specific info such as the star ratings, number of plays, that sort of thing.

as far as being useless, i suppose that's up to opinion--i gather you would rather use two programs where one, imo, does it better.

say, was i just trolled?

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Zugok]

But hey, I could be wrong, and we could all be getting $99 hPods next December. And we'll all be happy, right?

hentai pods? I could sure go with that.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[psleonar]

...an agreement that would allow MS to buy future Apple developments. (This has a lot to do with why XP looks so much like a Macintosh OS in some ways.)

I'm not sure that's correct. Microsoft hired frogdesign to design the user interface for Windows XP ("Luna.")

frogdesign was responsible for many of the early Apple II and Macintosh industrial design (but not the Aqua user interface, which was an outgrowth of the product design of Jonathan Ives.)

For those who love -- or hate -- XP's interface, you have to thank/blame frogdesign.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[byolinux]

Taken from Apple press release...

Beginning this summer, the iTunes software and a desktop icon guiding users to the music site will be preloaded on HP Pavilion, Media Center and Compaq Presario desktop and notebook consumer PCs.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Basehart]

"probably"

I AM LOST? You're Probably Lost is the premier silly site of our time. Orginal Content Added Monthly! * YPL is still on HIATUS! *. ...

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[matastas]

Some of us technically competent also use whatever is pre-installed - I see no value in using a browser other than IE. It's a commodity.

With HP's brand equity and channels, it might be a great movie. Apple addicts still use iPod because of the Mac integration, while the PC crowd goes with something familiar to them (the HP brand). Apple gets paid on every unit, HP gets quick time-to-market and a great platform.

So what's the issue?

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[matastas]

I disagree: MS is trying very hard to provide platforms/apps that allow companies to use DRM to protect their patents. WMP is a perfect example. Apple's 'Rip, Mix, Burn' tagline is a bit of a copout: they know people might steal music, but they want to encourage use of their product (and perhaps spin a fun, slightly counter-culture sheen on it), while throwing out the obligatory legalese ('as long as it's your music!').

Not sure about your argument, there. MS is viciously working to implement DRM at multiple levels of the PC, in order to get trust from content providers. In turn, hoping that they use MS delivery methods to move product. Apple just has a great integration method/ad campaign for selling the iPod.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

NeXT is only doing well because they DITCHED the x86 platform. Its still a perfectly good example.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[TCQuad]

It seems obvious that part of the licensing deal would stipulate that HP cannot undercut Apple's pricing.

But, if the license is similar to the one regular Apple retailers adhere to, then there could be bundling implications. I mean, a normal retailer is only able to bundle $20 accessories with their iPod, but HP could bundle these desktop thingies that they like to sell with their knock-off. Imagine the implications of being able to buy a 600 dollar PC for 800 or less with a knock-off iPod. It could even manifest as a rebate on the PC, so HP wouldn't be breaking any rules. The undercut is much more severe than just potential iPod buyers, since you could end up pulling some of the iPod-wanting potential switchers away from the Apple brand.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[ProfessionalCookie]

HPi Pods? Is that a fast gas powered all wheel drive R/C Music Player? How long does a tank last?

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[mhbtr]

This is touched on a bit here, but not enough...

The big gain for Apple is QuickTime. Apple once had a deal with Compaq to include QT on every Compaq shipped. This was back in the days when MSFT played dirty (I guess I should say dirtier) Anyway, MSFT scuttled that deal.

This is a HUGE win for Apple. As has been said many times by many pundits, Apple was going to lose EVENTUALLY if they did not support WMA on the iPods or start supporting WMA in the music store. It was only a matter of time.

This move, however, gives MPEG4/QT/AAC legitimacy, and creates an installed base for these [more] open standards than the proprietary WM formats. Especially with HP being one of the first companies to come out with a Media Center PC (I think Gateway was the first). HP has traditionally been MSFTs showcase company for new technology, like the concept computer last year. Now HP may be saying, if we are creating a media center type machine we want to develop it around OPEN standards, not ones where we pay MSFT at every stage of the game.

All of a sudden, AAC, FairPlay, MPEG4, etc., all look like they could succeed in the industry - hell, even win. You never know. But no longer can you look at AAC and QuickTime and say that it is only a matter of time.

It surprises me (hell - it really doesn't) how the pundits have missed this. This is NOT about the iPod. This is NOT about the Apple Music Store. This is ALL about the competing media standards and what this means for QT and the MPEG alliance going forward. This IS huge.

Eytan

--
Q: How do you convert ordinary water into Holy Water?

A: You boil the hell out of it.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[ohasten]

A lot of people don't get that. I personally do not want to be locked into a M$, Gov, media company, homeland security DRM scheme.

This IS huge in the format/DRM wars. In the larger picture it goes back to to the 1984 commercial. It wasn't about Big Blue, it was about having a powerful tool at your fingertips. I pay for that when I buy my Mac. I pay for the ability to see iTunes playlist "automatically". (I do have to turn on a preference)

I would think that /. 'rs would be rooting for Apple because the alternative, in all its Windo$e permutations involves strict controls and payments.

There is a revolution going on. Has been since people realized that PC's were useful. We can either keep control of our PC's or give it up.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[mhbtr]

No, you are right. Apple is not giving up the ability to have others sell it, it is HP that cannot resell other products, like MusicMatch (I don't know if it is MusicMatch specifically.) HP may not partner with other vendors of these kind of products for a few years [multi-year, however many that is...]. Apple, on the other hand, has no such clause.
Eytan

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

It may have been reported here, but that report would be wrong.

Between $.80 to $.90 cents per song is handed over to the record companies. The rest is to cover iTMS costs. It is not a going to be a profitable venture, but it might just break even with enough volume.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

apple and hp have swapped hardware before, the color stylewriters (4100, 4600's i think) were basically hp printers with apple badges. although, those printers sucked ass and cost more than the hp versions.

chris

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[overunderunderdone]

As apple sells more and more music, they are approaching profitability

I actually recall an Apple exec a while ago saying that they were already close to breaking even. It was a while after this that another exec said they were not seeing a profit on it. This could mean that they are already at or near the tipping point where it becomes profitable with greater sales volume or that it IS profitable but they are plowing the profits back into expanding the service, adding new features etc. Or that it is modestly profitable but not in any way that is significant to a company the size of Apple. At best it's now a mere 25-30 million in revenues that's nice but not very significant to a company that has revenues of $4-5 Billion.

However, I could see it being a real cash cow if it succeeds in appealing to the general population. Sure it's only a few pennies of clear profit for every dollar in revenue, but that could potentially be a LOT of revenue. That is one of the reasons I think they missed the boat with the iPod mini pricing. They need a model at a price point which will have true mass appeal and become the next "big thing". The mini is just too expensive to fit that bill. If they don't watch out someone else is going to hit that magic price and steal their market from them.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[overunderunderdone]

as well as an agreement that would allow MS to buy future Apple developments. (This has a lot to do with why XP looks so much like a Macintosh OS in some ways.)

The money, and the promise to continue developing the Mac versions of Office, was part of a settlement in a patent dispute over technology MS had allegedly stolen from Apple. The agreement ended up being a patent cross-licensing deal which would settle the patent dispute and let M$ save face and not admit any wrong since they were *officially* just paying that large undisclosed sum to make up for the fact that Applehad significantly more patents than MS (at that time). In reality of course they were paying the large sum because Apple had caught them red handed but didn't want to stake their future on a long drawn out lawsuit.

However, the whole deal has now expired and presumably Microsoft has purged their technology so that they aren't using any of Apple's patents. If XP DOES still have Apple patented stuff in it it's either the result of another deal or they are potentially looking at another lawsuit. Also, MS is now free to drop development of Office.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[good soldier svejk]

The $150 million wasn't exactly a gift. It was a stock deal which gave MS amazingly favorable terms on the purchase. They bought the stock, which after three years became convertible to common shares at 4:1, for just under the common share market value of about $16. Unlike Apple common stock, this preferred stock paid a dividend. IIRC, MS sold their quadrupled shares at a market price somewhere around $80.

Also, conspicuously absent from the deal was an MS commitment to port Office to OS X, which is what Gil Amelio had been holding out for. Luckily for Apple, MS decided to go that route of their own free will. To be fair, without Carbon, which which was Jobs's baby, it is unlikely MS would have ported Office.

My memory is that Apple's cash reserves at the time were closer to $6 billion. IIRC most of this derived from a convertible debenture issue. Another large chunk came from the sale of capital assets (manufacturing facilities and equipment) and equities, notably some of their valuable ARM hodings.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Blondie-Wan]

It's going to happen here. Initially some ppl will buy HP instead of iPod, Apple will cry, and cut the license.

There's a key difference, though - Apple didn't make the Mac clones, and thus didn't get money from the hardware. It is making HP's iPod (or whatever they wind up calling it). Apple will make money providing the players to HP, who will merely resell them.

I'd bet there are sections of the agreement that stipulate HP can't cross certain boundaries to compete with Apple's iPods (selling its player for dramatically less, for example). It's not like Apple wouldn't have thought of this stuff already.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

They did license out the Mac OS in the late '80s and the competition nearly forced them out of business. Other vendors were allowed to create desktop computers that ran the Mac OS.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Feral Bueller]

If this is the case, then iPods will go the same way as Macs have - fantastic, innovative (where have I heard that before?), but with a small select user base.

1/3 of the current market for Hard Drive-based mp3 players.

That's quice a niche.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

LOSE, man, LOSE!

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Kam lion]

Apple had over $1 Billion in cash. Remember that Apple bought Steve Jobs' NeXT for $400 Million then bought Power Computing for $200 Million. Microsoft's $150 Million investment was a strategic way of telling Wall Street that Apple had no problem with its software developers specially with the Redmond company. Apple didn't need money from Microsoft. Apple agreed to open some of its technologies to Microsoft as a part of the deal. And Microsoft agreed to provide the Mac platform with office-software for a period of 5years.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Makes sense.. When you're playing catch-up, hire the designer that Apple got tired of six years ago..

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[ObiWanKenblowme]

It's more that cash is still the end goal, but people with a long-term outlook realise things like recognition and publicity are what keep the cash coming to you. Brand recognition and ad campaigns might cost you a lot right now, but you'll have a better chance of still being around to make your hard earned cash a few years down the road.

Re:Dear Apple: why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple certainly has the capacity to bundle the iPod with its computers as well - they can't be spooked by HP's ability to undercut price via bundling and/or rebates. I think, after weighing all the positives and negatives in this deal, Jobs realized that building ties with the HP (the only logical PC company for Apple to ally itself with) will provide future opportunites far beyond the iPod, iTMS or even AAC.

PC buyers will be using Apple hardware on a grand scale. That's unprecidented. Somewhere down the road, Apple will either port OSX to X86 or partner with other PC manufacturers in selling PPC OSX machines, and having HP in their wheelhouse will make faster work of this.

It's not that Jobs was against cloning IMO, rather the *horrendous* job Apple did with its first cloning effort, where companies like Power Computing were able to innovate better than Apple, both in hardware/speed value and marketing message.

Windows can't remain the 90% solution forever, and Jobs knows that only Apple offers the only other viable alternative. Fiorina certainly does as well. As Carbon/Cocoa provides code portability and OS9/Classic dependence subsides, Apple will be able to much more nimbly move into markets that would have been unthinkable in the past.

Plus, it's a shot over the bow of MS, both from Apple and HP, making it clear that 100% Windows solutions are not in the best interest of business partners and consumers. Competition is good, choice is good, innovation is good. MS' vaporware music store/device doesn't cut it when the rubber hits the road. Apple took the risk. Apple's got the goods now.

They did it right, so they win this battle. Be prepared for some real innovation to come out of Redmond now...

Cool

[inode_buddha]

HP gets a media player. Gonna need *something* for cheer whilst standing in the unemployment line... oh, wait! I can't afford it!

Re:Cool

[TrippTDF]

I'm right there with yo, buddy! I'm about to get canned in about 5 minutes, I think!

Double the iPods

[rhetoric]

Double the crap. I'll stick with iRiver thanks.

I am never buying HP again.

[SirPsychoSexyMD]

See HP news below. I still have a God given right to choose what I won't buy. If you outsource, I'm not buying any of your products.

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[lycono]

While I applaud your apparent patriotism and support for American jobs, I can't help but snicker at this. I am reminded of a friend I used to know who was a VERY staunch vegetarian, she wouldn't even eat food that had been prepared on the same grill or in the same pan as a meat product. And yet she wore LEATHER shoes.

So yes, you have a God given right to buy from whom you like. So I will assume that you only buy "American made" products from companies in the United States?

Do you drive a car or truck? Was it made in America? That's a loaded question since there really is no such thing anymore, I can't think of an automobile company that doesn't assemble vehicles from parts made or assembled in another country. Your vehicle may indeed have been put together here in the U.S. but a large portion of the parts are assembled or manufactured in other countries, essentially "outsourced".

Don't get me wrong, I hate outsourcing as much as the next guy, I work in tech and worry about the job prospects, but this is natural market evolution. It happened in manufacturing a couple (a few?) decades ago. Now it's happening to tech. The country adjusted back then, it will adjust now. Will the process be painful? I think it already is. But I have hope that the outcome will be positive.

So while I applaud your sentiment, I think we need to be realistic and consistent.

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't use the auto argument. You know nothing about automobile manufacturing and where the profits go.

Go away.

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[cioxx]

I am reminded of a friend I used to know who was a VERY staunch vegetarian, she wouldn't even eat food that had been prepared on the same grill or in the same pan as a meat product. And yet she wore LEATHER shoes.

Let me be the first one to tell you that vegetarians don't eat meat for variety of reasons, which does not necessarily involve ethical ideology. Vegetarians in most part, avoid animal foods for health concerns, and you would find many, who often consume eggs and milk. Humane animal treatment comes in distant second.

The group you're trying to lump her into is called veganism. They don't eat meat, and at the same time avoid (to most extent) purchasing products derived from animals (i.e. leather, oil, fur, etc). Vegans rank animal rights, environmentalism, and ethics ahead of health. /nitpick

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you outsource, I'm not buying any of your products.

I'm sure you'll look very cool riding your Harley Davidson motorcycle in your home-made clothes.

Of course, your hog will be missing a few parts, and you won't have a helmet, but hey, at least you aren't buying anything that was made by those eeeevil foreigners!

I've got news for you... If you are serious about not buying from companies that outsource, I guess you are done visiting slashdot, because there hasn't been a computer manufactured complete in the US out of US-made parts since the 70s.

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[zpok]

No more belgian waffles for you. Bad boy!

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[cens0r]

Of course then there are the people like me that are somewhere in the middle. I do support animal rights, I don't eat meat, I do eat organic free range eggs, and organic milk. I also do wear leather goods (although given the choice between a leather and non leather product or equivalent utility I would choose the non leather).

The main reason I'm a vegetarian is health. Mad cow is scary. And since cows are fed to chickens and chickens are fed to cows, I really question the safety of all our meat. Ethical, environmental, and political ideology rank as other reasons. I think we should be eating free range and organic food. I think farms should be smaller and not in the hands of agri-business. I think the way most food animals are treated and slaughtered is appaling.

I also am realistic enough to realize that I do have to live. I don't like auto manufacturers, but I do have to have a car. So I do. Sometimes I have to wear leather (it's hard to find a nice pair of dress shoes or hiking boots that are leather free). In an ideal world I would be eating free range meat and all organic produce. Unfortunately I can't afford to live that way. I do the best I can with in my means, I figure it's better than nothing.

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[Anonymous Coward]

Many veggies make a conscious choice to wear leather shoes. Petroleum harvesting causes a great number of problems for animals. Buying used leather instead of new plastic is a responsible decision.

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[kleinux]

> Do you drive a car or truck? Was it made in America? That's a loaded question since there really is no such thing anymore...

Sure there is, you buy a Toyota or a Honda :D

Wasn't that a good snip at the ... It really makes it look like lycono stopped there. Muhahaha.

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[mark-ss]

Hmm...the iPod I just bought shipped from Shanghai.

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[chmilar]

No one has contracted Mad Cow Disease from their shoes....yet.

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[Anonymous Coward]

>And yet she wore LEATHER shoes.

Sigh. For years I was consistent - no meat, no leather. Then the only nonleather goods store in town went out of business, and I tried to mail-order shoes... totally intractable.

So I gave up. I'm realistic now and *inconsistent*.

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[TrancePhreak]

IIRC, animals were only fed to each other in the smaller farms that were trying to compete. This is part of what caused Mad Cow to become so prominent in the UK. After the big trouble with it, people in the UK switched away from this method of produce. The Mad Cow in the US came from Canada, where I have no idea how they are regulated. Blame Canada, I guess.

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[ricosalomar]

Don't be to rash in making the wearing of leather hypocritical for vegetarians.

I've been a vegetarian since 1986, and not solely for health reasons, although I do enjoy the benefits of a healthy vegetarian diet. I'm a vegetarian because of my refusal to participate in the brutality with which food animals are treated, and the catastrophic impact meat has on the environment. I'm from North Carolina, where hundreds of thousands of hogs are slaughtered every week. I don't want to be a part of it and I'm not. By not eating meat, I enjoy better food for me and my family, lower food costs, vastly lower environmental impact, and knowledge that if everybody ate like we, the word would be a much better place.

Leather does not fit in a similar category. That is, there is no better, cheaper, healthier, more ecological alternative to a good pair of Chippewa hiking boots (proudly made in USA).
Furthermore, I may buy one pair of boots every four years, a belt every five. How many pounds of beef does an average American (US) eat per year? Remember that each pound of beef permanently pollutes 1000 gallons of water. Most Americans die because of what they eat, not their shoes.

So being vegetarian and wearing leather is not hypocritical, wearing fur, yes, a belt, no.

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[GlassHeart]

Vegetarians in most part, avoid animal foods for health concerns, and you would find many, who often consume eggs and milk. Humane animal treatment comes in distant second.

Outside the US, the rationale for vegetarianism is more often religious or quasi-religious, and in terms of sheer number probably dwarf US vegetarians. Buddhism and Hinduism are two major religions that urge vegetarianism.

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[cens0r]

animals are still fed to eachother in the US. The law states though that you can't have canibal cows (you can't feed cows other cows). But you can feed cows to chickens and then chickens to cows, which would cause the same problems. We also feed cows to dogs and cats, which in turn are fed back to cows and chickens (what do you think they do with all those unwanted pets?).

Re:I am never buying HP again.

[TALlama]

And, to bring this back to the story at hand, Steve Jobs himself is a vegan (albeit one who occasionally eats fish).

Just in time for the Superbowl ad

[The I Shing]

Just in time for the Superbowl ad and the Pepsi promotion thing.

I wonder what color the HP iPod will be.

Will it have the same font as the Apple iPod?

Re:Just in time for the Superbowl ad

[foo12]

ZD Net quotes Phil Schiller as saying "HP Blue"

Re:Just in time for the Superbowl ad

[Phrogz]

From the first paragraphs at zdnet:

Apple will manufacture the player, which will not have the iPod name but will have the same design and features as Apple's third-generation iPod players, Phil Schiller, senior vice president at Apple, said in an interview. Also, the HP music player will come in "HP Blue," he said.

"The way we look at it, HP will be reselling an iPod device," said Schiller, who noted that the device will display the Apple logo at start-up and will work with all of the accessories made for the white-hued Apple varieties.

So it sounds like it'll be blue, but other than that be the normal iPod, running the same OS.

Re:Just in time for the Superbowl ad

[th77]

The I Shing said: I wonder what color the HP iPod will be.

According to ZDNet's article, the HPod will come in "HP Blue"

Re:Just in time for the Superbowl ad

[DomCurtis187]

Re: Font

doubt it... since the ipod uses "chicago", and the new ipod mini uses a tahoma-like font, the players can display different fonts.

apple would most certainly want something very visible in the UI to seperate its products from the HP product(s), so i'm sure HP would use a font that doesn't scream "apple" like chicago.

Re:Just in time for the Superbowl ad

[azadism]

It will be HP blue. And Apple is producing the iPod, just slapping an HP logo on the case http://news.com.com/2100-7354-5137473.html

Re:Just in time for the Superbowl ad

[Anonymous Coward]

according to cnet, the will be hp blue:
http://news.com.com/2100-7354-5137473.html

also of interest is that apple will keep its logo on boot screen as noted in the following excerpt

'Apple will manufacture the player, which will not have the iPod name but will have the same design and features as Apple's third-generation iPod players, Phil Schiller, senior vice president at Apple, said in an interview. Also, the HP music player will come in "HP Blue," he said.

"The way we look at it, HP will be reselling an iPod device," said Schiller, who noted that the device will display the Apple logo at start-up and will work with all of the accessories made for the white-hued Apple varieties'

it appears that this is a win for hp in that they get their own mp3 player with no r&d costs or fight against ipod jauggernaut name... apple wins because quicktime and itunes get greater legitimacy... hp shiped 30% of the computers last year so thats an enormous market for apple to jump ahead of the other music stores... furthermore, it keeps expanding its own mindshare b/c they keep their logo imbedded in the software and hardware... cool, huh?

Re:Just in time for the Superbowl ad

[cpeterso]

This is proof once again that Apple is the only innovator in the industry. The PeeCee companies are just hollow shells, slapping their brands on cheap OEM boxes.

Re:Just in time for the Superbowl ad

[Jon Abbott]

Yeah, I'm surprised the HP iPod won't be offered in beige... :^)

Re:Just in time for the Superbowl ad

[Smallpond]

Let's see. The makers of the LaserJet will want to use either Garamond or Helvetica. Please, just no more Times New Roman.

Oh. and there is "a rat" in separate.

Re:Just in time for the Superbowl ad

[lotsofno]

It you'd bothered to look at any of HP's computers in the past year and a half, you'd notice that nearly all of their computers are gray. I'd prefer a gray ipod of the blue, anyday.

Re:Just in time for the Superbowl ad

[prockcore]

Yeah, I'm surprised the HP iPod won't be offered in beige... :^)

I know it's supposed to be a joke, but major PC OEMs haven't make beige computers since the iMac came out.

HP...Where Did You Want To Go.....

[evil_roy]

Yesterday

HP must be really desperate

[Anonymous Coward]

After the HP Compaq merger their quality has gone down the drain. Most of the products they offer (with the exception of the HP9000 series) are pure shit. Congrats Fiorina.

Brett Glass

Doing things right this time

[fxer]

Well not licencing MacOS back in the day was obviously one of the major causes of Apple nearly falling off the face of the planet. So if they want to learn from ther (many) historical blunders and licence the iPod while it is at its current peak of popularity, more power to them. Way to go Steve!

Re:Doing things right this time

[Anonymous Coward]

They did in fact licence MacOS. But it was the clone market was beating them in price, so they pulled all the of the licences.

Re:Doing things right this time

[krb]

perhaps the parent means licenced early on, like, in the 80's. It may have mattered, it may not have.

In my opinion, apple has always excelled when their hardware and software are joined together. i had a clone (PowerCenter 180 or something like that), and it just wasn't the same as having a real mac. part of why things work so smoothly is because the hardware is as refined as the OS and other apple software... there's a lot to be said for that.

anyway, it's an old debate, but i'll choose computers based on quality over market share most of the time.

Re:Doing things right this time

[Myopic]

this is only true if Apple wanted to be a software company, a la Microsoft. if Apple had decided to get out of the hardware business and just sell its (superior) OS software, then licensing the hardware specs would have been a good move; but Apple wanted (and still wants) to be a whole-system vender, which it can't be (economically) if it licenses its hardware.

indeed, one major reason that Apple's offerings are so great is that it controls the whole system, so of COURSE it all integrates well. if they had other people build the hardware, they wouldn't be able to integrate everything so well or so quickly -- PLUS they'd lose all the hardware revenue (which, i understand, is the majority of the revenue). i'm no economist, i'm no computer salesman, but i certainly would call it "obvious" that licensing is the reason Apple failed to lead the PC market.

to tell you the truth, i personally think that the reason Apple doesn't sell as many computer systems as WinTel is the same reason the Green party doesn't get as many votes as the Republican party: PEOPLE DON'T LIKE HIPPIES. even when the hippies are right. Apple computers are used by potsmoking, creative, freethinking people (at least, that is the stereotype, mmkay?), and all the stick-in-the-butt people don't want to associate themselves with those types. and by far most people have sticks in their butts.

but i'm not trying to be facecious: i'm a potsmoking, creative, freethinking person, and i use a Mac -- probably for that reason. i mean, i like to SAY i don't use Windows because it's insecure and ugly and whatever, but the real reason is that i LIKE the underdog, the paradigm breaker, the hippies -- maybe it's no surprise that i chose a Macintosh.

Re:Doing things right this time

[tgd]

For the 10,000th time, Apple has been and always will be a hardware company, not a software company. They write innovative software so people buy their hardware. Period.

Given that fact, why exactly is not licensing MacOS obviously one of the major causes of Apple nearly falling off the face of the planet?

Seems to be based on their very successful business model (you start a company and be profitable for 30 years!), not licensing MacOS is exactly the right thing for them to have done.

Re:Doing things right this time

[Anonymous Coward]

i had a clone (PowerCenter 180 or something like that), and it just wasn't the same as having a real mac.

Actually it nearly identical to a real Mac, except for the case. Same as a 7300 or something.

part of why things work so smoothly is because the hardware is as refined as the OS and other apple software...

That was true until the mid 90s when they completely changed the hardware platform without really changing the software. MacOS 7.x was a buggy disaster on even the geniune Apple PowerPC/PCI machines.

Re:Doing things right this time

[Anonymous Coward]

>to tell you the truth, i personally think that the reason Apple doesn't sell as
>many computer systems as WinTel is the same reason the Green party doesn't get as
>many votes as the Republican party: PEOPLE DON'T LIKE HIPPIES.

No, it's because the hardware is overpriced shit. It's technically no match for the Wintel PC knocked up for the same money. I don't care what colour the outside of the case is. I know no gamers or coders or musicians who use Apple stuff.

Re:Doing things right this time

[bogie]

If Apple had been smart enough to license and port Mac OS to X86 they might actually have a sizeable marketshare. Apple trying to stick it out as a hardware company is what dragged Apple down to its current position as a total niche hardware maker with a 3% market share. If they had licensed and pushed for Mac OS they would have become a much bigger software company than their current hardwaree company model provides for. Look at Microsoft. They correctly bet on software and while the rest of the world including Apple lost their shirts in the cut-throat hardware market Microsoft gained ground until they became the dominant player they are today.

So yea Apple is a hardware company with Good profits on a small amount of hardware. They could have been a software company with a smaller amount of profit on a Huge amount of software. They made a dumb decision and have insured they will never be more than a bit player and forever lost the chance to become a market leader of Microsoft's size.

btw last time I heard Apple was getting by on a .5% operating margin. Barely getting along compared to what they could have been doesn't seem like something to celebrate IMO.

From an end user view I can see Apple users doing nothing but praising the small niche that Apple reside in. From an economic point of view I can only shake my head and think of what could have been.

Re:Doing things right this time

[Drakonian]

If Apple had licensed the Mac OS back in the day, they could be where Microsoft is today. Say what you will about MSFT, they are a huge financial success.

Re:Doing things right this time

[fxer]

Well Apples business model is anything but successful. In fact, it is probably the worst of the 3 most common business models. Their approach of doing about everything in house suits people like Intel, behemoths with the cash, than the comparative little guys like Apple who statisticly do better when they farm out certain things (like manufacturing, which apple recently started doing). But to say Apple uses a sucsessful business model, one that took them from the top of the pile to the bottom, is unresearched at best.

Re:Doing things right this time

[soft_guy]

Microsoft was never a hardware company. Apple was a hardware company from the beginning.

When should they have licensed? Whatever year you pick, I can come up with a scenario where it would have killed them.

Making the transition from a hardware company to a software company is not easy and not without pain. When they did it in 1995, it almost killed them. Trying to do that also killed Be.

And look how having the IBM PC cloned really helped IBM. (No, it didn't.) And they choose to do that on purpose. (No, they fought cloning all the way.) Having the PC Cloned almost drove IBM out of business.

People who advocate that Apple should exit the hardware business don't know what they are talking about. (Or else advocating that Apple commit suicide.)

Re:Doing things right this time

[juuri]

Gah. For the 10,1000th time. Apple has been and always will be a SOLUTIONS company, not a hardware or software company.

Apple is about a total computing environment.

Re:Doing things right this time

[Anonymous Coward]

*Raises hand* Count one. Gamer and coder.
As for not knowing musicians who use Apple stuff, I guess you don't know any musicians.

Re: Doing things right this time

[gidds]

Well not licencing MacOS back in the day was obviously one of the major causes of Apple nearly falling off the face of the planet.

Er, yeah. Coz IBM made an absolute mint licensing their PC, didn't they?

Or rather, M$, Dell, Gateway, Compaq, and just about everyone else in the industry made fortunes...

Anyway, as other posters have observed, this isn't entirely comparable. I reckon Apple's probably doing the right thing this time, but partly for practical economies-of-scale reasons, and partly to keep the relatively-open AAC format popular and preserve a level playing field -- giving M$ an audio format monopoly would be bad for everyone.

Re:Doing things right this time

[bonzomcgrue]

There's a store in Mountain View, CA that sells, according to the sign on their window, Ergonomic Seating Solutions.

"Chairs", people! These are called "chairs"!

Re:Doing things right this time

[Myopic]

mm. i'm a professional coder. i do perl and java. i've only ever used Linux and Mac to do dev on (ie not Windows), but i think Mac is, at least, no worse than Linux.

Re:Doing things right this time

[HeghmoH]

I don't really understand this line of thinking.

Imagine Apple opened up their OS, let people build Mac compatibles, and ported their OS to x86.

Given this scenario, what is different about Apple that would let them survive, face to face against Microsoft on Microsoft's home turf, where every other company that tried this failed? OS/2 died, the DOS clones died, NeXT couldn't do it, Be couldn't do it, etc.

The thing you do not want to do is sell a product that directly competes with MS-DOS or Windows.

this, I think will help solidify APples control

[the_2nd_coming]

over the HDD music market.

apparently, the only thing that will be different about these devices is that they will be HP blue and have HP on the case. the rest of it is unmodified. the iPod firmware will be the same as the firmware that the rest of the product line uses.

Re:this, I think will help solidify APples control

[ReallyQuietGuy]

actually it seems to be that the real "trigger" for this is Dell's release of their MP3 player.

"the enemy of my enemy is my friend"

although some Mac people (what with Steve Jobs putting up the picture of Micheal Dell with the bulls-eye on his forehead at a Macworld a few years back) think that Dell is Apple's enemy, it doesnt by far compare to the war being fought between HP and Dell.

HP obviously found it better (and I agree) to align with the leader (in an ironic twist, since usually its Dell who is ahead).

This whole announcement isn't about "HP and Apple", it's about "HP vs Dell"

Re:this, I think will help solidify APples control

[ReallyQuietGuy]

drats, hit submit too quick

what i wanted to say (which was why i replied in this thread) is that its obviously to HPs advantage to align with the leader now (and in exchange, have to offer wider iTunes distribution) than to invest who knows how much money churning out yet another MP3 player (the field is getting very crowded actually. don't forget the chinese manufacturers popping up, and the multi-function phones-and-mp3-players on the way, with the new super-small HDDs).

HP got burned many times before with "create our new product lines" (think "Jornada", with their colour bit-depth cockups and product recalls). much much safer this way.

and, best of all, this is a dell tactic - invest no R&D money and just slap your logo on someone else's product !

A better article

[destructo666]

Internet News

Attack of the Clones, Part II

[artemis67]

Wow, Jobs licensing out music hardware and software to HP... could a Mac clone be far behind?

Re:Attack of the Clones, Part II

[Anonymous Coward]

No, I doubt it is even on their radar. The last time they allowed clones it almost killed them.

Re:Attack of the Clones, Part II

[artemis67]

Yeah, but how is this any different? Apple makes money on the enormous markup on the iPods, same as they do on Mac systems. I'm sure HP will add some refinements to distinguish it in the market, so that it's not just an iPod with an HP logo on it instead of an Apple.

Seriously... Jobs may be testing the waters here for another Mac clone market.

Re:Attack of the Clones, Part II

[SQLz]

Maybe HP is going to do the manufacturing of the Apple branded i386 OSX machine.

Re:Attack of the Clones, Part II

[Llywelyn]

Before you get moderated too far up by people who want a Mac clone and have wanted it despite that it would kill Apple, let's look at what this deal actually entails.

The HP_iPod will be the same as a 3rd gen iPod in terms of hardware. That is, AFAIK, the extent of the hardware side of this "cloning." Apple probably gets a percentage of the profit from this (I don't see them as the type to go for a one-time fee).

This either doesn't undercut Apple at all or barely does so. If HP produces them on top of that (haven't read the article yet) it just provides additional iPods when Apple already has trouble meeting demand.

As a plus, HP is also going to install iTunes all HP systems. That's of tremendous value to Apple, since then nobody will need to download them.

This is not cloning, is not vaguely related to cloning (more like Apple licenses the right to produce a specific model of Apple computer with rebranding), and Apple is not going to be undercut or suffer cannibalization of sales as a result of this.

Re:Attack of the Clones, Part II

[Llywelyn]

> so that it's not just an iPod with an HP logo on it instead
>of an Apple.

That's *exactly* what it is.

A blue iPod that says "HP" on it.

Apple even manufactures it.

In the terms of Phil Schiller: ""The way we look at it, HP will be reselling an iPod device,"

(From the CNet article on the topic).

Re:Attack of the Clones, Part II

[Anonymous Coward]

> Seriously... Jobs may be testing the waters here for another Mac clone market.

Why would he do this now when one of his first acts upon returning as Apple CEO was to kill off the existing Mac clones at the time? If anything, hardware had become cheaper now, which would give willing cloners the ability to drastically undercut Apple on price. I could bet we won't see Mac clones or OS X on Intel as long as Steve is running the show over there (or maybe even never).

Re:Attack of the Clones, Part II

[Myopic]

yes. very, very, very far behind.

Re:Attack of the Clones, Part II

[Anonymous Coward]

"Before you get moderated too far up by people who want a Mac clone and have wanted it despite that it would kill Apple, let's look at what this deal actually entails."

Sure, summarise the article for us.

"This either doesn't undercut Apple at all or barely does so. If HP produces them on top of that (haven't read the article yet) it just provides additional iPods when Apple already has trouble meeting demand."

Wait a minute! You haven't read the article? You're summarising the article/telling us what HP is going to do?

I really don't understand why this post is labelled as informative. It provides no information, just uninformed speculation. Read the article, then post if you still feel the need.

Re:Attack of the Clones, Part II

[Anonymous Coward]

"Apple probably gets a percentage of the profit from this (I don't see them as the type to go for a one-time fee)."

Why would they do that? Wouldn't they simply manufacture the unit, then sell it to HP at a wholesale price which includes margin over and above the manufacturings costs? This is generally how commerce works, not with manufacturers taking a 'cut' of a retailers 'profits'.

Re:Attack of the Clones, Part II

[Anonymous Coward]

Begun the clone wars have.

Why?

[Marco_polo]

I personally avoid HP products like the plague. Having had to support them as a technician has been a nightmare. Besides.. I thought HP's business model was to sell stuff cheap, then charge and arm a leg for refills!

Re:Why?

[happyfrogcow]

agreed. do their computer cases still have warning stickers on them saying that you void the warranty by simply opening up the computer case? at a job I had in college, the computer I had was an HP and it had such sticker.

the case, mind you! i can understand a hard drive saying that, but a case?!

HP... blehc.

Re:Why?

[Jedi1USA]

Apparently they are attracted by Apple's Battery technology then? :^)

Re:Why?

[davidstrauss]

I thought HP's business model was to sell stuff cheap, then charge and arm a leg for refills!

It still is. Have you read about iPod battery replacement costs?

Re:Why?

[the_2nd_coming]

that was packard bell not HP moron.

Re:Why?

[happyfrogcow]

Maybe you are right, it was many years ago.

The "moron" was not needed though. You must function excellently in society.

Re:Why?

[madcow_ucsb]

I've definitely seen that sticker on my mom's HP.

Re:Why?

[the_2nd_coming]

yes, the "moron" comment was out of line a bit, but I had not called anyone it yet today and I felt your comment deserved it.

and I do function well in REAL society, on-line...I have little patience for people who say incorrect information.

Opinions however, I respect, just don't back them up with FUD or bad information.

Re:Why?

[the_2nd_coming]

no you haven't.

Packard Bell was the only company that used them, I was unfortunate enough to own one of them. none of my friends computers had them.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

It still is. Have you read about iPod battery replacement costs?

Sigh. That horse has long since disappeared into the soil.

Re:Why?

[happyfrogcow]

By having a Packard Bell that had it doesn't mean HP doesn't/didn't have them. I've been unable to find anything about either brand of systems and this warranty through several google searches. For now, I'm sticking to my original memory of it being an HP machine. I don't think I've ever used anything by Packard Bell. I do remember on several occasions telling family members not to buy HP computers because of that sticker.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

You are not correct. Microlink used to use those stickers too.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it was Packard Bell.

Packard Bell sold an awful lot of computers due to this sort of brand confusion. At the time, HP was making just about the most expensive PC on the market, with a reputaion for using high-quality parts. I know of several people that heard that Hewlett-Packard was the best computer from somebody, then went out and bought a Packard Bell thinking that they had followed that person's advice.

Of course, HP's these days are not really made much better than the old Packard Bells were, so it's sort of like HP is the company sponging off the HP brand identity now.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Some Packard Bell customers also thought their computer was from the "phone company".

In fact, Packard Bell was an old 1930s brand name that was resurrected only because it sounded like other respected companies.

Re:Why?

[afidel]

That's funny I like supporting HP printers and their Vectra line were some of the easiest computers to work on ever. Of course their consumer line blows goats, maybe you had to work on Pavilions?

Brilliant

[Keighvin]

Thoroughly smart move by HP - tie into a strong offering from Apple's growing recognition in the field. Apple wins tremendously by getting the backing of additional hardware distribution and essentially provides nothing (support & specs) to turn a profit on the licensing portion while having another route to their system lends it significantly to their legitimacy (and therefore brand exposure).

Re:Brilliant

[bennomatic]

Actually, my understanding is that Apple is not just licensing the iPod, but manufacturing HP's version as well. One of the Apple head honchos was quoted as saying something like, "We see this as just adding another reseller to the list."

The only risk for Apple would be if it doesn't work out and they end up with a million blue iPods on their hands.

Does anyone know if the earphones are going to be blue, too?

Hooray Carly!

[mekkab]

Yet another reason to Love Carly Fiorina. Apparently HP still knows a thing or two about good engineering; even if its someone else's engineering.

Re:Hooray Carly!

[shaka999]

Don't you mean the only reason to love Carly?

She has trashed HP. Ruined investor value. Fired half the company. Shipped tons of jobs offshore. Ruined moral.

The list goes on...

Re:Hooray Carly!

[Kenja]

I'll be sure to thank her for sticking Quick Time onto all the HP desktops when I'm burning her in effigy tonight.

Re:Hooray Carly!

[Anonymous Coward]

Value of iPod just went down due to association with HP and Carly.

Re:Hooray Carly!

[muckdog]

That bitch can burn in hell

Re:Hooray Carly!

[tealover]

Carly Fiorina is at the forefront of the Outsourcing movement and has recently said that "American Workers are not gauranteed" jobs.

Fuck that bitch.

Americans are probably buying half of HP's damn products. Why the fuck should we prop up her multi-millions while she advocates the elimination of the middle class ?

All you people who voted Republicans into offices, you're reaping what you've sowed. The majority of you will be white trash in a few years.

At least you'll fit in with the NASACR audience that you condescendingly patronize now to feel patriotic.

Re:Hooray Carly!

[Anonymous Coward]

I want to anally rape Carly with a baseball bat. She is a fucking evil bitch.

Re:Hooray Carly!

[muckdog]

Tell Carly what you think of her and HP

Re:Hooray Carly!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Insightful"?

In addition to "Fair/Unfair", meta-mod needs a "Funny" option.

Re:Hooray Carly!

[LionMage]

If an Indian will do you overpaid IT job for less than good for him.

Nice, glib non-argument. Problem is, you assume that someone here must be overpaid if they are an IT professional. But that doesn't track, because IT salaries have been falling since the dot-com implosion. No, what it really boils down to is, guys in India can work cheaper because the cost of living (and the standard of living) is lower. As soon as they start demanding a higher standard of living, or emigrate to the U.S. to seek a better standard of living (which many of the good Indian IT professionals do), companies will start shifting the jobs elsewhere. There's always someone in a developing country who's willing to sling code for peanuts.

Maybe you need to look into a new field. Its called a free market.

And some of us are too old and/or too poor from the recent IT job crisis to be able to afford to retrain for a completely different job in a different field. And some of us like working with computers -- we're the ones who are true geeks, and would be computer hobbyists even if we weren't working IT jobs. Then again, it's hard to maintain a computer hobby if you can't afford a cutting-edge computer... Because a real hobbyist does more than read e-mail and do word processing, right? Right?

As for a "free market," what a joke. A truly free market would allow anything, including outright corporate warfare and terrorist action. Right now, we have a rule of law imposed by our government to keep everyone and everything in check, individuals and corporations alike. As soon as governments become irrelevant, look to see disgruntled and highly-skilled people turning to more radical expressions of their disaffection.

If I don't have a right to a job, then I don't have a right to much else, do I? But then again, neither do you. Taken to the logical extreme, anything becomes fair game, including murder and outright thievery. It's amazing what a thin thread our entire society hangs by. People become like cornered animals when their livelihoods are threatened. Nuff said.

Apple will never forget

[SexyKellyOsbourne]

Considering that an Apple would most likely be on every desktop if they had allowed licensing of their products in the 1980s like IBM did, it's quite wise for them to allow licensing of another succesful, revolutionary product that brings the fruits of technology to the average joe.

I'm glad a good man like Steve Jobs no longer ruminates over his mistake, and instead learns from it. Ironically enough, he even works hand in hand with IBM, now.

Re:Apple will never forget

[FortKnox]

I doubt it. Steve Jobs probably got trumped by higher authority (board of directors) to force him to license out technology.

Wait and watch how iMacs and such won't be licensed out. Jobs is probably taking medication to avoid exploding while HP makes stuff based on Apple technology.

Re:Apple will never forget

[Anonymous Coward]

IBM didn't license out their pc products. The architecture was reversed engineered. IBM used Microsoft DOS and an Intel microprocessor. IBM did not sign an exlusive contract with either companies, which allowed them to sell to anyone. Once the architecture was reversed engineered, any computer company was able to clone the IBM pc and there wasn't much that IBM could do about it.

Re:Apple will never forget

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly, just like IBM is on every desktop ...
uh no wait...

Re:Apple will never forget

[tmark]

Considering that an Apple would most likely be on every desktop if they had allowed licensing

You mean like how they were letting a few company build Mac-compatible machines in the mid 90's, only to screw them all over royally when it came to renewing ? I remember a few people I knew buying them, but certainly neither Apples nor clones weren't flying out of the stores.

Re:Apple will never forget

[torpor]

Rubbish. Have you met Steve Jobs? Do you know him personally?

To assume that he's blowing his stack, just because you think you have a 'psychological profile' of him based on some sort of 'critical ability' of yours to read, is not only naive, but patently rude.

('Insightful'? There needs to be a 'Presumptious' ...)

I'll bet this was in the works all along for the Apple iPod/iTunes Hegemony Invasion Plan.

Re:Apple will never forget

[Anonymous Coward]

from user profile of torpor:
seclorumNO@SPAMmac.com

wow it really is true what they say about mac users looking after themselves. remove the foam from the mouth. no one will believe you.

Re:Apple will never forget

[Lars T.]

Actually, when they realized they had lost the race, IBM at least tried to cash in on some patents, thus retroactively licensing their technology.

Re:Apple will never forget

[SineWaveMaster]

I seriously doubt this is a matter of Jobs being trumped by his Board. One of the biggest gripes from the financial markets has always been that Apple's Board of Directors is not nearly independent enough and that they often succumb too easily to Jobs' whims.

It may be fair to claim that they encouraged the licensing of the iPod, but to suggest that Jobs' was strong-armed by them flies in the face of precedent. Somehow I don't see Al Gore and Larry Ellison, among the others, successfully pressuring Jobs to any significant degree. And if you don't believe that, I'd point to the rather authoritative way that Jobs runs both Apple and Pixar. Most everything done in each are because "Jobs' will be done".

Re:Apple will never forget

[Anonymous Coward]

In the US, IBM was forced to license these patents under an earlier anti-trust settlement over "plug-compatible" minicomputer peripherals. Until recently, IBM has always made a small cut of every PC sold.

Re:Apple will never forget

[morcheeba]

IBM didn't license the PC's design... the clones had to reverse engineer the BIOS and made compatible machines without IBM's blessing. The difference between Apple and IBM is that you could get the IBM OS from Microsoft, but Apple was the only source of Apple-compatible OS's.

(also, the apple II roms were harder to clone... it was tightly written code that had to be placed at specific locations... it would be hard to re-write them differently without altering the size and/or placement of the routines)

Re:Apple will never forget

[nelsonal]

While I certainly don't disagree that Apple's board is basically Jobs' lackeys, They bought him an airplane, and let him serve as CEO of both Apple and Pixar. Not too many CEOs get to moonlight. Ellison recently stepped down back in Sept of 02, in between the cleanup of corporate governance and his announcement of the proposed merger with PeopleSoft.

Re:Apple will never forget

[Razzak]

Think iTMS = OS and MP3 Player = Hardware.
To do the exact opposite of what they did before, they need to make the iTMS work on ANY mp3 player. This is a half-step. They're letting others make the hardware, but limiting the OS to apple-licensed hardware.

However, I'm not saying that the music download industry exactly paralells the computer hw/sw industry of thepast. We'll see what happens.

Re:Apple will never forget

[Anonymous Coward]

IBM never allowed cloning. The cloners were able to do their thing because Phoenix was able to duplicate the functionality of the IBM BIOS, the hardware was all commodity, and Microsoft produced the OS, not IBM. To repeat: IBM never allowed cloning.

IBM never allowed cloning.

IBM never allowed cloning.

IBM never allowed cloning.

IBM never allowed cloning.

IBM never allowed cloning.

IBM never allowed cloning.

Never never never never never. They were as against the idea as Apple, and they sued the first cloners. They lost, of course. Who won from cloning? Not IBM. Their PCs are nice, but their sales are miniscule compared to Dell, HP, etc.

If IBM was a PC-only company, the cloners, and if not them, then OS/2, would have killed them.

If Apple had licensed the Mac OS, it is very unlikely that they would be in Microsoft's position now. They'd more likely be dead.

Re: Apple will never forget

[gidds]

Considering that an Apple would most likely be on every desktop if they had allowed licensing of their products in the 1980s like IBM did...

Maybe. But where would it get them? They're primarily a hardware company, remember. A small market they can make money from is better than a large one they can't. How much does IBM benefit now from their machine being so popular? Not a lot.

It might have been good for you folks, but Apple's not a charity.

(I don't include myself, as I'm quite happy using Mac OS X at the moment, thank you. In fact, I'm probably better off for it not being the majority platform - it means that Apple are still working really hard on making it better than the majority platform, that I don't get all the worms and viruses that go round, and many other benefits.)

Printer woes, now iPod?

[photomic]

I wonder how long it will take HP to break the iPod drivers. . .

Re:Printer woes, now iPod?

[Walterk]

Probably no longer than it took them to kill the Alpha.

Re:Printer woes, now iPod?

[Bob Davis, Retired]

The drivers are contained wholly within iTunes (and its child programs) so they can't really fuck with 'em.

The real question is "How long until a Windows Update breaks QT / iTunes / iPod?"

QuickTime on 20% of the PCs sold in the US

[hazman]

With the installation of iTunes, Apple has managed to get QT installed on alot of computers without resorting to whining or lawsuits. Congrats Apple.

Re:QuickTime on 20% of the PCs sold in the US

[Anonymous Coward]

What???

Are you telling me that Apple is using their monopoly of online music distribution software to push their free multimedia player onto peoples PC's? How horrible. What kind of evil corporation would do such a thing?

Re:QuickTime on 20% of the PCs sold in the US

[amichalo]

Wow - that IS impressive.

I have always prefered Quicktime over Real or Windows Media, even before I bought a Mac. I would love to see more Quicktime content.

NASA and JPL have some very COOL Quicktime of their rover EDL.

Re:QuickTime on 20% of the PCs sold in the US

[lotsofno]

i'd say this was a good thing, if QT on Windows wasn't the software equivalent of AIDS.

Re:QuickTime on 20% of the PCs sold in the US

[Anonymous Coward]

you are an idiot.

I had some time to waste.

Windows media and Real are more like AIDS. ever read the legal agreements for them? I assume you never used Real.

Quicktime has been the best for over 10 years. Its player has had some problems, but the framework is still best hands down. It also has never caused me or my business any problems. Its just a library.

I can play back files from quicktime 1. Bet I'll have problems with the other guys when they get that old... somewhat do already.

Also if you can READ the windows installer does not scatter crap around as bad as many other windows programs. (or windows itself which is WORST in my book---they integrate worthless crap and then lock out admins from removing it. its a pain to remove and the 'built-in' crap can't be removed.)

since I'm anon, I'll not get to reading your most likely predictable reply which will probably not add any more insight than I already have. (which is probably significanly more than you; u an MCSE "expert"?)

Re:QuickTime on 20% of the PCs sold in the US

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a mac. I know pc. that is why I have a mac. I also have the $$$ to buy the porshe of computers.

I am familar with win32, unix, Mac classic api. Learning the new cocoa one now. One can see where .Net stole from apple, sun, and ieee.

oh, and the quicktime file format is great too. very flexible. hence mp4 using it.

streams are over rated, since its all just packets in the end. QT files are fine for doing that. They just lack 1 thing that ogg has. (which is similar to the multi-stream features real did, ms copied)

Also quicktime is cheap to use. mostly free really, I think they should open source under LGPL or something. the only get real money from bundling deals with big corps.
At least they could open source the sound manager and merge it with openAL...

Re:QuickTime on 20% of the PCs sold in the US

[Anonymous Coward]

How do you know there was no whining involved?

Together

[mr_tommy]

Apple has much to gain from this. HP is effectivly giving them a bigger audience to the Itunes music store, in a similar fashion that MS Windows has given Aol via putting links to AOL on the desktop of all new PCs. The strategy is tried and tested; more importantly, it works.

HP also gains by getting a neat bit of kit which they can brand, allowing them to compete against Dell's new musical offering. Seeing as almost everyone is getting in on the act these days, it would seem foolish for HP not too; and why not do it with the best thing that there currently is on the market? Who knows, they might even intergrate it better with the PC? They might even bring the price down a bit. Who know- whatever happens, i'm sure it will be good for music lovers.

Re:Together

[Anonymous Coward]

Big deal, after reading Carly's little snip about outsourcing it'll be a very cold day in hell before I recommend or purchase any kind of HP product. She just earned a place with Gates and McBride at the top of my shit list.

PC world clout

[amichalo]

This is a pretty huge sign that the PC world is impressed with what Apple has done. From a company that clearly has the ability to enter a new market behind other market leaders and have success (iPaq PDAs), they recognize that they can't build something to defeat the iPod (unlike Dell's DJ move) and their best move is to join 'em.

Beter still, HP is preloading apple software on their systems. This will be a boon to Apple as it makes it even easier to access the music store.

With AOL, HP, and Pepsi all endorsing iTMS and the iPod, 2004 is shaping up to be a big year for Apple and On-line Music.

Re:PC world clout

[Dutchmaan]

From a company that clearly has the ability to enter a new market behind other market leaders and have success (iPaq PDAs)

Remind me again who makes iPaq's?

Re:PC world clout

[Anonymous Coward]

That would be Compaq. In other words, HP/Compaq. In other words, HP.

Re:PC world clout

[TheCrazyFinn]

Remind me which was the 3rd major PDA platform to market?

HP came in after 3Com/Palm had the market owned, and after Apple had dropped out, and made a real splash with the iPaq and Jornada (iPaq being the only really successful PocketPC, and Jornada being one of the two other break-evens [the other being Toshiba's]).

Re:PC world clout

[amichalo]

The iPaq is made by Compaq, a division of HP.

Re:PC world clout

[amichalo]

HP came in after 3Com/Palm had the market owned, and after Apple had dropped out, and made a real splash with the iPaq and Jornada (iPaq being the only really successful PocketPC, and Jornada being one of the two other break-evens [the other being Toshiba's]).

Just my point - HP(Compaq) has demonstrated the ability to enter a market with an obvious leader (Palm), and use a competing technology (WinCE) to deliver a highly successful product (iPaq).

In the digital music arena, it just underscores how well Apple has devised the iPod and iTMS that unlike Dell, HP has looked at this market and said "as good as we are, we aren't gonna beat what Apple has built" and decided to join forces.

Re:PC world clout

[cens0r]

Of course Dell did the same thing. The Dell DJ is really a creative nomad zen.

Re:PC world clout

[amichalo]

The Creative Nomad Zen NX doesn't look the same to me as the Dell DJ.

From the press release, I understand the iPod will be the same as the existing 3rd generation iPod, ust with dark "HP Blue" color instead of white (which should look sharp with the chrome back).

Re:PC world clout

[cens0r]

Well Dell decided to make it look different or possibly creative demanded it. But under the surface they are the same player. They also both use music match to sync and the dell music store is just a rebranded music match store.

Re:PC world clout

[amichalo]

Thanks for the insight. What is the deal with the Dell store. Do you download it? is it only for Dell owners or can anyone use it?

Seems like there are two kinds of on-line music stores - the integrated ones line iTMS (music match) and the web sites that make you downlaod it like buymusic.com

I would like to see statistics on how well those websites do compared to the integrated solutions.

Re:PC world clout

[cens0r]

Yep, I do believe there are only two kinds of music stores. There are the integrated kind (musicmatch, napster, iTMS, and some that work with WMP) and the kind that work through a web interface (usually IE only). The Dell store can probably only be used by dell customers, however I'm pretty sure it is just a re-skinned version of the music match store; so technically anyone can use it.

Re:PC world clout

[TrancePhreak]

My Zen does not use MusicMatch to sync. Perhaps you have it confused with a different player. Creative has always used their own software for syncing. THere might be some 3rd party addon for MM to sync, but that does not ship with the Nomad.

Re:PC world clout

[jeffgeno]

Well Dell decided to make it look different or possibly creative demanded it. But under the surface they are the same player. They also both use music match to sync and the dell music store is just a rebranded music match store.

The Creative Zen series use 2.5" laptop hard drives and the Dell DJ uses the same drives as the iPod, they're different under the surface. The Zens also don't use Musicmatch.

I've heard rumors of Creative manufacturing the Dell DJs, but it's definitely not a rebadged Zen.

Jeff, Zen Xtra Owner

Re:PC world clout

[Chad Page]

The original Compaq iPaq was a revised version of the old DEC Itsy project, done by a Linux-friendly group back east. It's one of those things where it's a pity DEC didn't have more visionary management...

All behold the HP-od!

[d0n quix0te]

Now thats creative thinking from Carly... With AOL and now HP firmly behind it, Apple is making sure that don't make the same mistake once again (ie not licensing the Mac early enough to establish the standard...)

IMHO, this is even bigger news for QuickTime the stealth tech behind iTMS.

Re:All behold the HP-od!

[d0n quix0te]

And BTW, in other news HP announced that the HPods will come in an array of tasty colors such as:

Beige, Sand, Tan, Silvery Black and Brown.

One Year

[thomas.galvin]

Apple tried this with their computer architecture, and they began hemoraging business. The licensed cloners undercut Apple's hardware prices, and Apple itself couldn't compete.

HP will, in all likelyhood, make a "cheaper iPod," and cut into one of Apple's darling moneymakers. Remember, Apple makes no money off of iTunes MS, but uses it as a way of promoting the iPod.

I give this one year, max.

Re:One Year

[the_2nd_coming]

Apple is building the things and providing the software. this is nothing like the clones where the clone makers were making the hardware and using the software.

Re:One Year

[Durandal64]

Yeah, because no one at Apple would ever think of putting a stipulation in the contract to bar HP from undercutting Apple ...

Re:One Year

[eroyce]

Apple will continue to make money off the hPod because it is simply a re-branding scheme. Unlike Apple's failed attempt at licensing previously, this is the same iPod, different color, different name. Apple wins with whichever player is sold because they make them both.

Re:One Year

[tmark]

Well, they certainly weren't smart enough to thnk about putting sucha stipulation in the contract with the clone makers, were they ?

Re:One Year

[Myopic]

it depends on whether or not Apple learns from history. Apple's lawyers didn't manage to write a very good contract with Microsoft in the early 90s, after all...

Re:One Year

[ealar dlanvuli]

Wow, because you know the same... anyone... worked at Apple 10 years ago...

Really, they did...

Re:One Year

[chia_monkey]

I give this one year, max.

Out of curiosity, how long did you give the original iPod to survive? The one that came out two years ago amongst other mp3 players, mp3 players that worked with PCs, cheaper mp3 players, players that are not "those damn Apple products"? Did you plan on them becoming the dominant player or did you plan on them dying? I'll be honest...I wasn't that excited when they came out two years ago. But then I saw this as something big. When I finally saw the dominant numbers that the iPod commands in the market, I was truly impressed. So now Apple has the opportunity to expand that lead even more and edge out the competition. I take your bet and raise you a few years with a much larger market share owned by iPod devices.

Re:One Year

[soft_guy]

I hear they got a new CEO since then.

Re:One Year

[Durandal64]

That's why none of the people in charge of the clone strategy are at Apple anymore. I hear Steve Jobs is under consideration for CEO.

Re:One Year

[n8_f]

The clones were a different proposition. The whole idea with the clones was that they *would* undercut Apple, building cheap machines and killing each other with commodity pricing. They would expand the Mac market and sell into markets Apple wouldn't make enough profit in to deign it worth their effort while Apple would continue to rake it fat profits on the high-end workstation and pro machines, up-selling some of the new converts to boot. Apple wanted to have its cake and eat it too and they arrogantly assumed that no one could make a Mac as well as Apple (hence leaving the high-end to them).
Unfortunately, they were wrong and it has turned into one of their classic blunders. Luckily, they learned from it and moved on (or rather, Jobs moved in). Or something like that.

How is this different? First, they aren't going to be allowing HP to innovate on these products like they did with the clones (and Palm did with its clones, a very similar situation). There won't be any features on the HP iPod that the normal iPod won't have (well, nothing major, anyway; they probably need some differentiation). HP is basically going to be a glorified reseller of Apple iPods.
Second, and this is the real difference, Apple is bargaining from a position of strength. The clone initiative was an act of desperation from a company that had seen its market share plummet over several years and been plagued with all kinds of management and production problems. It was the last gasp of the old Apple before it died and NeXT was reborn in its stead. With the iPod, they don't need HP. They are going to sell whether HP gets a piece of the action or not. This is simply a strategic move to broaden their base and stop a potentially troublesome competitor. And I'm sure HP is happy to let Apple take on Dell in this battle.
That isn't there aren't dangers. Palm was almost killed by clones and licensing as well. But if Apple isn't blinded by their arrogance, they should come out just fine.

So this is it?

[klipsch_gmx]

This was hinted at in this story.

But, let's think about this for a second. With half a bajillion companies now offering song downloads at $0.99 and none coming to us without some sort of DRM involved, why would we choose one over another? The Apple iTunes store has had so much success because of (1) the sales success of the ipod and (2) the ease on integration of iTunes and OS X.

Now let's turn this into a look at HP. HP's MP3 player (while the MP3 player in question is purely speculative since it has not been released) is probably no different than any other MP3 player and I doubt they could be much better than the Neuros. So this gives us no need to choose the HP music store over any other store. Further, HP hardware is not proprietary in the sense that getting music from the HP store would either be a required method of getting music or the easiest because of a lack of other sources.

This seems to tell me one thing: HP's journey into online digital music sales will most likely be short lived.

Re:So this is it?

[redJag]

Maybe not so short-lived. The HP iPod will be compatible with iTunesMS. I think this could be an excellent thing for both parties, assuming Apple has limited how low HP's price can go.

Re:So this is it?

[rogueuk]

this comment manages to avoid every fact because he just did a quick copy + paste from a +5 comment in the article he linked.

looks like this dude just saw "hp", "ipod", and went off trying to leech some karma. what a tool.

HP Design, Apple Tech?

[Mattb90]

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I think from this we will be seeing HP design their own digital music player (so it will probably be in the same design style as maybe the latest iPaqs), in the same way as Dell are, but unlike Dell, the core technology will be Apple's iPod tech, including the OS, and the link to iTunes.

So, I'm guessing we're actually getting a new device in terms of looks, but a device that is less likely to suck because it already has good working technology.

1GB

[mpost4]

it would be nice if HP did a smaller one and sub $100, I would think that a $99 for 1Gb would be good for the low end market.

Re:1GB

[the_2nd_coming]

this is just a re-branding , Apple is taking its product line slapping HP all over the cover and letting HP sell it.

Unless

[kevin_conaway]

Apple starts bundling iPods with HP desktops, how does this make a difference. Its well stated that Apple makes nearly no money off of iTunes so what would the advantage of putting iTunes on HP machines be? Is it the case that iTunes hooks people onto iPods? Doesnt seem that way to me

Re:Unless

[jeeeeem]

I suspect the advantage is that HP wrote Apple a nice fat check.

Re:Unless

[Anonymous Coward]

You're missing the whole point.

All of this exposure for Apple is good. Most consumers who buy their computers at Walmart have no idea what a Mac really is or what's so special about it.

As more companies embrance and help expand the Apple universe, it can only mean good things for Apple in the future.

That and it's been said that iTunes exists for the sole purpose of selling iPods. Get people to try iTunes and see how great it is and they might be persuaded to go out and buy an iPod.

Re:Unless

[BensonLeung]

Actually, it does seem to be the case that iTunes itself functioning solely as a music jukebox is a good reason for people to buy an iPod, even if you have a PC.

iTunes allows the user to organize their music, and even go as far as Rendezvous share it over a network. I have friends who, since iTunes was released on Windows last October, have taken their entire MP3 collections, and meticulously tagged it all to take full advantage of iTunes...

since then, they have started to think about a portable player, and the logical choice for one, since they already use iTunes as their primary jukebox on the computer, is the iPod. The iPod share's iTunes's simplicity... so my friend got a 40 GB iPod... he's got a PC.

iTunes helps sell iPods, without a doubt.

Re:Unless

[mabhatter654]

That said, you have a point...Apple should rebrand more stuff. I'd love to see the Airport Extreme router pushed into the PC world as well...heck it's possible to build a "PC" with everything outside the beige box apple branded right now...they've got some cool stuff...Cinema displays, keyboard/mice [hey, i think they're cool], airport, iPod, etc...and as Apple slowly wins both commercial and OSS software, it's starting not to matter if you have a WinTel PC anymore...that next computer could be a MAC!

Aww COME ON

[cubicledrone]

HEY!!

Do the Apple engineers make minimum wage? Do they make less?

Did they outsource their jobs before they wrote iTunes?

Where were these products invented?

Oh, wait. You want it both ways! You want to sell the glitzy, hip popular products. So you'll write a big fucking check to Apple, but you won't pay a living wage to the PEOPLE YOU EXPECT TO BUY YOUR SHIT!

Buy low, sell high, right? Pay a shitty wage and don't let the workers share in the success, but demand 20% top-line growth and extra bean salad at the board meeting. The corporate dream continues.

Re:Aww COME ON

[arrow_s]

They are paying ppl. who will be buying for many years...and there are more than 2 billion of them...do the math now.

Meanwhile...

[Otter]

My favorite iPod news of the day was Rio putting a note on their site (now removed, apparently) claiming "featured in the Steve Jobs Keynote at MacWorld 2004". True, if you consider "Look how superior the iPod Mini is to this Rio!" to be "featured". Give them points for taking a positive attitude, certainly...

Sorry Microsoft

[larry bagina]

Now that HP will have an AAC player, and AOL and HP are using iTMS, it looks like Microsoft's arguments against AAC (ie, no choice in players or sellers) has disappeared faster than pizza left in Cowboi Kneal's cubicle.

Re:Sorry Microsoft

[Mattwolf7]

Now that HP will have an AAC player, and AOL and HP are using iTMS, it looks like Microsoft's arguments against AAC (ie, no choice in players or sellers) has disappeared faster than pizza left in Cowboi Kneal's cubicle.

Except for the fact that iTunes is still the only way to get them. WMA is supported by Napster, Microsoft and Dell (I believe Walmart too)

Re:Sorry Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

And WMA is controlled by Microsoft. So, what's the difference here?

licensing Apple's design, not technology

[mapmaker]

HP is licensing Apple's iPod technology

What technology is there to license? It's a portable harddrive. I'm pretty sure HP can build one fo those without needing to license anything from Apple.

It's the design of the iPod that makes it unique, not the technology. That's what HP is licensing.

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology

[Lars T.]

It's the magic pixie dust that makes the iPod successful, unlike all the iPod-killers.

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology

[GoBears]

what is truly sad about this is that DEC Systems Research Center (aka DEC SRC, aka Compaq SRC, now part of HP Labs and basically moribund) built a pocket-sized HDD jukebox in 1998.

needless to say, none of SRC's parent companies pushed it hard enough. (Compaq did sell PJBs commercially for a while.) so now HP gets to license the iPod...

Win Win

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple: Gets $$ for each hpPod sold. Gets iTunes/QT installed on a bunch of computers that would never had installed them.

HP: Gets to sell THE mp3 player. Probably gets rights to deeply discount with a new computer, thus driving computer sales. Gets its player access to 70% of the legal download market.

cheap iPod knockoffs

[harvey_peterson]

Hmmmm. Might mean a cheaper iPod knockoff that I can actually afford ($250? What were they thinking? for $50 more I can get 3x the space.) I wonder if there is a non-competition clause so HP can't sell iPod knockoffs that will work with Macs...

Right time to make a move on Apple's part

[Anonymous Coward]

With the iTMS and the iPod being such hot sellers and the only store to be selling FairPlay AAC files, I think that this move is a tremendous step in the right direction for the adaption of a fairly friendly form of DRM and will help Apple effectively fight off the onslaught of Windows Media based music stores.

With this announcement, it is a ringing endorsement for the iTMS and iPod platform...now Apple needs to upgrade the iPod Software so that it supports Windows Media files as well and really show it's intent to dominate the portable music market...could this also indicate a future willingness of Apple to cooperate with traditional rivals in bringing Apple innovations to the mass market, an HP branded OS X PC would certainly offer a viable alternative to the Wintel solutions most average customers end up with.

This will be a big bonus for ITMS and QT

[Dutchmaan]

I'm sure that HP computers will have a pretty good chance at having Quicktime and iTunes preinstalled to support the 'hPods'

not only will this add to the QT base but will ad potential customers to the iTunes music store..

I think this is a really good move for Apple.

Re:This will be a big bonus for ITMS and QT

[Anonymous Coward]

And the best part is that HP gets to deal with the techsupport costs from all Apple's nasty DRM driver shit that comes with iTunes.

Re:This will be a big bonus for ITMS and QT

[Anonymous Coward]

They also get to deal with all the techsupport calls when the tooth fairy accidentally takes a key off of someone's keyboard because she thinks it's a tooth. You know, there are more of those calls than whatever fairytale you're talking about.

Re:This will be a big bonus for ITMS and QT

[prockcore]

'm sure that HP computers will have a pretty good chance at having Quicktime and iTunes preinstalled to support the 'hPods' ..
I think this is a really good move for Apple.

I dunno.. I think the last thing Apple wants is for anyone's first experience with Apple to be Quicktime on Windows.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

We'll all be happy with $99 iPods

[Rikardon]

The scary thing is how many Slashdotters will agree with you, while many will be the same people who just excoriated HP (only four stories ago!) for exporting tech jobs overseas.

"HP is fscking over American IT employees because we let them. Our government won't even.... Ooooh, iPods!"

Re:We'll all be happy with $99 iPods

[Anonymous Coward]

In this case, HP only exported the "tech jobs" down the road a few miles.

The OLD Hewlett-Packard would have made their own portable music device -- It would of course use their own proprietary software, have several large knobs, come with a 300 page programming manual, and weigh 8.5 lbs.

However the "New HP" isn't so much a tech company but instead just makes money sticking their brandname on other people's products.

Re:We'll all be happy with $99 iPods

[FatRatBastard]

"HP is fscking over American IT employees because we let them. Our government won't even.... Ooooh, iPods!"

Just like Ford fscked over the buggy whip industry, the horse and carriage industry, and decimated the "we clean horse shit off of the street" service industry.

Joe Slashdot: just like everyone else "Keep the gov't off my back, man... but put it on HPs because they've found someone that can do my job for half the price. Fuck progress, I have a mountain of credit card debt to pay off."

Evolve or die, simple as that. If you're skill level was only as high as your average India-based call center worker / HTML jockey you ain't all that skilled.

The Cure

[happyfrogcow]

The only thing good about HP has been the series of ads with The Cure's "Pictures of You" song.

now they can ship their hPod's with that song.

Not sure how it could suck...

[justMichael]

Apple will manufacture the player, which will not have the iPod name but will have the same design and features as Apple's third-generation iPod players, Phil Schiller, senior vice president at Apple, said in an interview. Also, the HP music player will come in "HP Blue," he said.

Found here, props go out to guet for posting the link over on macslash

Re:Not sure how it could suck...

[oberondarksoul]

Finally, a little bit of decent information on this HP iPod. Instead of speculating, we can at least comment on the fact that Apple's gonna be making money despite the HP branding, not to mention getting iTunes onto the desktops of HP's WinTel line. Cheers for the link.

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology ?????

[adzoox]

Nope:

There are several things to license:

Why do you think we don't see lots and lots of 20 30 and 40 GB hard drive players? Apple co creates/researches with Toshiba and apparently now with Hitachi.

The iPod OS is very slick and even though there are close to similar copies - none are as easy - no other player has the games that I'm aware of either

Lastly, they license the implementation of Quicktime AAC - while AAC is open itself - the secure component of it Apple owns.

+ Apple licenses out the firewire name

how ironic is this

[falcon5768]

when you remeber that HP used to build some of Apple's stylewriter and laserwriter brand printers.

Re:how ironic is this

[Large Green Mallard]

bzzt (sort of). The Stylewriters were rebadged Canon BJ's. Some of the laserwriters may have been Canon (some of the personal laserwriters were Lexmark) but most were HP.

Re:how ironic is this

[CyberDave]

Bzzt! Wrong again. The last few StyleWriters were Apple-labeled HP printers. Specifically, the Color StyleWriter 4100, CSW 4500, and CSW 6500. Like the Canon-based printers before them, they could use the equivalent HP ink cartridges instead of the Apple cartridges.

Interestingly, Apple still sells cartridges for nearly all their ink-jet and laser printers. I've noticed that (at least as far as MSRP goes), the Apple ink-jet carts are less expensive than their HP or Canon equivalents. I used to work at a campus bookstore where this was the case, and we'd sell the Apple carts to people looking for the Canons and save them 8 or 9 bucks a pop.

CyberDave

So if you're Microsoft....

[Ibanez]

how the hell do you respond to this? HP is the largest PC manufacturer behind Dell, correct? And Dell has its plans to do its own Music Store, correct?

So Apple, who has already made great inroads to the PC market, is going to make it in even deeper. I think this bodes well for Apple, and I don't know how even MS could fight this off, at least not without doing something that would violate the rulings or what not from the monopoly trial.

Of course, if they did do something that might violate it, and it wouldn't surprise me if they did and it went unnoticed, this time Apple might get into it...

Anyways, the only bad thing I can see coming out of this for Apple is the fact that it might stop people from switching to Apple computers, since, unless the marketing is done well, newbies might not realize this is an Apple product, not an HP product.

BTW, I didn't RTFA so feel free to flame me, but how will Apple keep the supply up? Is HP going to help manufacturing etc.?

Blake

Re:So if you're Microsoft....

[Anonymous Coward]

Easy, incorporate code that "breaks" ITunes in the next XP Service Pack.

Re:So if you're Microsoft....

[Quixotic137]

...at least not without doing something that would violate the rulings or what not from the monopoly trial.

Yeah, because violating anti-trust rulings has really hurt them in the past.

Re:So if you're Microsoft....

[soft_guy]

I think this bodes well for Apple, and I don't know how even MS could fight this off, at least not without doing something that would violate the rulings or what not from the monopoly trial.

As long as Dubya is president, the anti-trust laws won't be enforced.

Second, why should Microsoft care?


Anyways, the only bad thing I can see coming out of this for Apple is the fact that it might stop people from switching to Apple computers, since, unless the marketing is done well, newbies might not realize this is an Apple product, not an HP product.

First, the article said that you would still get the Apple logo when you turn the HP iPod on. Second, I suspect that people will figure out that iTunes and the iTMS are Apple products. Third, I wasn't aware that the iPod got anyone to switch to the Mac anyway. Does it?

how will Apple keep the supply up

Order more from the factory? Apple doesn't manufacture anything anymore, as far as I know. Like most consumer electronics companies, they just rent factory time in Taiwan and Malaysia.

Re:So if you're Microsoft....

[PetWolverine]

If this ends up being a sweet deal for HP, they'll bite back at something like that. Microsoft has a lot of clout, but HP is still a huge customer, and the customer is always right (as long as he's got pockets as deep as HP's).

Re:First post

[Anonymous Coward]

Puh-lease. Trying hard is so uncool...

And anyway, about your formatting... what is your fucking problem? Did someone shove a fucking typewriter up your anus?

It's all about aac

[bbahner]

Apple gains an enormous amount from this- they will further solidify their proprietary audio codec as the standard for internet music distribution. We can be sure that HP won't be the only licensee. Apple has done this exactly right- create the most seamless integration in the industry, then graciously allow what would otherwise be their competition to join the party...

Re:It's all about aac

[Anonymous Coward]

AAC is not Apple's.

It's part of MPEG-4, an open standard.

If anyone's, it's Dolby's, since MPEG-4/AAC creation requires a licensing fee to them.

Re:It's all about aac

[entrager]

Apple gains an enormous amount from this- they will further solidify their proprietary audio codec as the standard for internet music distribution. We can be sure that HP won't be the only licensee. Apple has done this exactly right- create the most seamless integration in the industry, then graciously allow what would otherwise be their competition to join the party...

I don't mean to be rude, but you're wrong. AAC is a Dolby codec that Apple happens to be using. As many others have pointed out, this is about increasing iPod sales.

AAC info here and here.

Re:It's all about aac

[cens0r]

But the wrapper they put on it when you buy a song from iTMS is proprietary. AAC is about as open as WMA (both are fairly cheap to license, although you can look at the mpeg-4 standard for free), and WMA's DRM is just as propretary as Apple's DRM on AAC.

Re:It's all about aac

[laird]

"AAC is about as open as WMA"

Well, I agree that they're both formats that anyone can license, but there's a difference between an "open standard" completely controlled by a single vendor and an "open standard" controlled by a consortium of vendors and content companies.

Re:It's all about aac

[bonzomcgrue]

I think wrong is too strong a term, but I believe *your* comment is misguided.

Of course Apple benefits from the widespread distribution of the codec they have chosen. It might be a codec developed by someone else, but Apple was the one that backed AAC in a heavy way. They took it to the mass market, and it's in Apple's best interest to get as many people using it as possible.

>> this is about increasing iPod sales.

By introducing more people to AAC, Apple will sell more iPods, Macs, software, printers, cables and t shirts. From my viewpoint, this is all about increasing Apple profits.

Re:It's all about aac

[dbirchall]

Apple was the one that backed AAC in a heavy way? Silly me, I thought it was ISO IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11, who hammered out the MPEG-4 standard, and the MPEG-4 Industry Forum, whose members include quite a few makers of computers, operating systems and consumer electronics other than Apple.

Apple certainly doesn't seem to have fought the MPEG-4 standard like, for example, fellow MP4IF member Microsoft did. (As an aside, Fraunhofer Institute IIS and Thomson - who hold the MP3 patents - are also in the MP4IF.) But I'd expect that the majority of the lobbying for its inclusion would have come from Dolby.

I agree that it's all about selling more Apple stuff. :)

Re:It's all about aac

[bonzomcgrue]

You're right.

I bet ISO IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11 and the MPEG-4 Industry Forum were thrilled when Apple backed AAC in a heavy way. :)

Amazing....

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been lurking here for a LOOOONG time probably too long.

It seems people are negative towards anything Apple just to be able to say "I knew it would suck". This is a good thing for Apple and I can remember iPod posts people taking it for nothing some calling it "doomed to fail".

Apple is doing things right at least with digital music right now. Them joining with HP creates MINDshare that will boost their image as well as HPs.

If anything outside the tech world sheik is whats cool and lets be honest its what the mainstream is all about.

Sure you'll buy a Neuros and this other guy will buy an iRiver cause he is the one in a thousand who claims Ogg is sent from above.

But lets call apples, apples for a second (PUN WAS intended). Apple and more specifically iPod is the leader of this race and this just gave them a bit more time to get a drink of water.

In other news: Indians expand their vocabulary

[inteller]

HPs workfarce in Bangalore is updating their 3 day ESL crash courses to include the words QuickTime, Apple, and AAC.

Re:In other news: Indians expand their vocabulary

[arrow_s]

While those in Silicon valley are enjoying the curry.

But will it run OpenVMS?

[Genady]

It's the vaxPod! Oh the irony.

Re:But will it run OpenVMS?

[JJahn]

Just imagine a beowulf cluster of vaxenPods

Ogg Vorbis?

[steveha]

Should we assume that this will have the exact same internal software, or is there a chance that HP will change things around? I'd love an iPod that could play my Ogg Vorbis tunes.

I wonder if the contract from Apple would even allow this.

Perhaps, for the PC market, HP would want to support Windows Media Audio files... and if as they are doing that, they might as well add Ogg Vorbis support.

I also wonder if HP will put FireWire on all their computers now, or whether they will just depend on the USB 2.0 support Apple already has for the Windows version of the iPod.

steveha

Re:Ogg Vorbis?

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you suggest to Apple to include Ogg Vorbis? If Apple is flooded with requests to play OV they might actually look at it.

Re:Ogg Vorbis?

[JonathanBoyd]

Perhaps, for the PC market, HP would want to support Windows Media Audio files.

Do you honestly think that Apple wouldn't think of that when they're writing up the contracts?

Re:Ogg Vorbis?

[ColMustard]

Look, dude. It's just a file format.

And quite frankly, it's really your fault for encoding your music in a format with such small market-share and a hazy future. That, too, is the price of Free.

Re:Ogg Vorbis?

[wcbrown]

iTunes has an icon file for Ogg and WMA. You can find it by opening up the package contents of iTunes and looking in the Resources folder. There they are, plain as day!

hPod, indeed...

[imcleod]

I guess Carly got the HP folks to Think Different about Innovation the HP Way...

(rimshot)

Behold... the thread of HP iPod naming suggestions

[llamalicious]

First in line:

hiPod - Comes with a free dime-bag, too.

Where's yours?

Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why? Uhh, I don't know. Maybe HP is paying them for it?

They will be "HP Blue"

[amichalo]

According to ZD NET's Article and reported by Mac Rumors, the devices will come in an exclusive "HP Blue" color and be compatible will all 3rd generation iPod accessories.

If you don't know what color "HP Blue" is, look at the /. icon for this story.

The 11th Commandment

[SQLz]

Thou shalt not buy what thou don't want to.

What's next?

[Anonymous Coward]

More proof that HP stopped innovating a long time ago. They buy more and more technology and develop less and less. The "invent" in their logo is only there for show.

I can't wait to see the HP rebranded Mac.

Re:What's next?

[dbirchall]

HP use a PowerPC chip? Nah... after all, they've got *fanfare* the Itanium! Which delivers better bang-for-the-buck than PA-RISC. What? We're not sure about that? Okay, er... um... better-bang-for-the-buck than Alpha! What, I'm wrong again? Well, it's got to deliver better bang-for-the-buck than the PowerPC. After all, hasn't HP built some of the fastest supercomputer in the world built with Itaniums?

What? You mean of the 4 systems HP has in the top 15 (all of which were in the top 10 last list, mind you) only one uses Itanium chips? The others all use Alphas? And most of the others are using either 32-bit x86 chips or PowerPC/IBM Power systems? And we got beat by a cluster made out of Apples?!

Oh...fsck!

Hello? Carly? Um... I think somebody checked the wrong box on which processor family we were supposed to kill...

Ah well, hopefully the iPod deal won't be another instance of "hitch your wagon to a falling star," like the Itanium has been thus far.

Re:Europeans are fags, that's why

[Anonymous Coward]

huh?

nice

[jeeeeem]

Well, this helps remove the bad taste left in my mouth by the pricing of the ipod mini (assuming HP releases at least one cheap player).

My gripe with the mini was this: Apple is winning the legal digital music race. The digital music experience is not complete, and hardly worth the trouble, without a portable player. By pricing the mini as it did, Apple seemed to say "if you can't afford to carry around an easily stealable and breakable $250, WMA is for you!" Since lots of my friends and family fall into that area, I lost my enthusiasm for iHegemony in digital music.

This may fix it! Now my poorer relations can fully participate, even though they may end up with a crummy, not-so-stylish player, to go with their crummy Windows PCs. They can still use the ITMS and iTunes.

I'm back to rooting for Apple. :)

This is aimed squarely at Windows Media

[Infonaut]

Talk about a perfect way to keep Windows Media from taking over the media creation and playback markets. Apple has a slew of professional and home user media creation tools that all leverage QuickTime, plus with the introduction of GarageBand, they're taking aim at the XBox crowd for media creation.

With the iPod, iTMS, and now HP-branded iPods, Apple is working hard to keep WMA from controlling online music. That also makes it more difficult for MS to dominate in the video playback market as well, because one of the supposed advantages of WMP is that it acts as a playback mechanism for a wide variety of media, all delivered in Windows Media formats.

Volume clout, plus guaranteed sales?

[silentbozo]

Sounds like Apple is going for mass-mass production of the iPod/iPod mini players to get per-unit costs down. Having a guaranteed buyer for a significant portion of them allows Apple to produce that many units without having to worry about excess inventory on their end.

Look for Apple to either make more per iPod on the ones that they sell, plus the revenue on units that they wholesale to HP. Also, I'd expect the recent shortages of iPods to be a thing of the past once manufacturing is ramped up. This is great news for 3rd party equipment manufacturers (like Belkin, and th replacement battery sellers) as they get to sell more product, at possibly lower prices.

Plus, Apple gets more clout with record distributors when negotiating future rates (or trying to get hard-to-license songs) since the available pool of iTunes/iPod users will grow.

This is win-win-win, for Apple, Apple partners, and iPod/iTunes buyers/users. The only people this would be bad news for are Microsoft and the other WMA player folks.

Re:Volume clout, plus guaranteed sales?

[willtsmith]

Apple Computer may end up either buying or merging with Apple Records. Apple is not so pleased that Apple violated their agreemant and is plunging headfirst into the music biz.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Re:Volume clout, plus guaranteed sales?

[mabhatter654]

i'm sure steve jobs has enough money to buy their families away from them by now.

Re:Volume clout, plus guaranteed sales?

[piovere]

confused am I

this is the only way I can come up with for Apple to make money off of this deal--the iTMS isn't raking in the cash, and it won't be, no matter how many people have it installed as a default. The iTMS was designed to sell iPods, which each provide gobs of $ worth of profit.

does anyone have any knowledge of the terms of apple's deal? Are they pulling down some percentage of the profit on each unit? Are they just licensing the tech (doesn't sound like it, since evidently Apple is doing the manufacturing)?

anyone?

ENOUGH WITH THE OGG VORBIS

[amichalo]

Not trying to start a flame but please, please don't start the Ogg Vorbis conversation. This is an APPLE device...APPLE is committed to AAC+Fairplay. Apple knows about Ogg, as do all the other WMA music sites and music device manufaturers.

As hard as it is to swallow, Apple has decided AGAINST supporting Ogg Vorbis in current devices. So have all but ONE music device manufacturer. The market isn't there because as bad as you want Ogg, you will settle for AAC and buy an iPod because it is a more complete package. And if you won't, then you are a market minority so small that Apple doesn't have the time and money to spend reaching you.

Re:ENOUGH WITH THE OGG VORBIS

[steveha]

as bad as you want Ogg, you will settle for AAC and buy an iPod

Actually, no, I won't.

if you won't, then you are a market minority so small that Apple doesn't have the time and money to spend reaching you.

But companies much smaller than Apple, such as iRiver, do have the time and money to spend reaching me.

steveha

Re:ENOUGH WITH THE OGG VORBIS

[Quikah]

There are two ogg supporters, Rio also supports it in the Karma.

I think a very good reason that they have not added support is that it would most likely kill their already weak battery life. The Rio Karma for instance can get 15 hours with mp3 but only about 9 or 10 with ogg. So getting only 2/3 the life on an ipod (5-6 hours) would really start to hurt.

They really should add wma support though, but I guess they really want to lock people into itunes.

Re:ENOUGH WITH THE OGG VORBIS

[Anonymous Coward]

Which is why they are "much smaller than Apple" and may remian so.

Re:ENOUGH WITH THE OGG VORBIS

[Anonymous Coward]

Ya right, apple is big because they ignore what users want and do what they want? Nah, apple is big because they have been around forever selling computers. ipod is a tiny part of their business.

And by the way, giving the customers what they want is good business, duh.

Re:ENOUGH WITH THE OGG VORBIS

[tgibbs]

But companies much smaller than Apple, such as iRiver, do have the time and money to spend reaching me.

Yes, if your products can't compete with the big boys, the other strategy is to go after a niche market that is so so small that the big players don't care about it.

Re:ENOUGH WITH THE OGG VORBIS

[prockcore]

But companies much smaller than Apple, such as iRiver, do have the time and money to spend reaching me.

--

Yes, if your products can't compete with the big boys, the other strategy is to go after a niche market that is so so small that the big players don't care about it.

Isn't that what Apple's business plan is?

Re:ENOUGH WITH THE OGG VORBIS

[tgibbs]

Isn't that what Apple's business plan is?

When it comes to music players and music downloads, Apple is the big boy.

Re:ENOUGH WITH THE OGG VORBIS

[keegleme]

Isn't that what Apple's business plan is?

not with the apple computer. and certainly not with the ipod. you should read your personal computer history again and remember once more why people use microsoft (hint: it's not because it's better). Apple computer having the niche market share is not the same as iriver etc. catering to the niche market. its a totally different story.

Re:ENOUGH WITH THE OGG VORBIS

[Phil Karn]

If Apple really wanted to lock people into iTunes, why did they provide that escape hatch that lets you burn uncrippled songs out to CD? Could it be the reason iTunes took off while the more restrictive services have barely left the starting gate?

This business is supposed to be all about giving people what they want, so why shouldn't I say what I want? I feel strongly about the importance of open, nonproprietary file formats, so I very much want Ogg Vorbis support in an iPod. I'd buy one in a heartbeat if Apple added it.

Sure, I like the iPod's user interface and its slick physical design, and for me those features can overcome the high price and the limited life of the built-in Li-ion battery. But they're not enough to overcome a very basic functional shortcoming: no support for any practical, non-proprietary file format. And because the iPod isn't the only game in town, I will gladly patronize their competition (iRiver) while I wait.

all this being said

[amnesiacdotorg]

i'll be really impressed when i see apple licensing mac os x to appear on an x86 hp desktop .

Re:all this being said

[ignipotentis]

I'll not only be impressed, I'll be first in line. The price of the apple hardware is the only thing keeping me from running OS X.

Re:all this being said

[Hawthorne01]

I'll not only be impressed, I'll be first in line. The price of the apple hardware is the only thing keeping me from running OS X.

Good. Then go here and look at the specs of a Mac of your choice. Then go here and compare a machine with the same specs.

Apple is more expensive than commodity whiteboxes, but against other name brands, they more than hold their own.

candi-pods make more sense now ...

[torpor]

... so, apple make the candi-pods price $249 so that they can make licensing deals of their tech to other companies, who are then challenged to make it cheaper/market-it-better ... hardware ubiquity drives the store, and a new music channel is now opened even wider ... giving consumers 'choice'.

pretty interesting. but i think its going to be even more interesting when sony get their 'my sony music' store working with their new md's ...

Re:candi-pods make more sense now ...

[sapporoitchy]

pretty interesting. but i think its going to be even more interesting when sony get their 'my sony music' store working with their new md's ...

Sony -- having one foot in content and the other in content players -- will have a hard time in the new music market if it continues to sit on the DRM fence. By introducing another proprietary, marginally-used and badly-named format (ATRAC3) on an idle platform (MD), Sony will finding itself fighting for scraps leftover from the Apple/HP/iTunes feeding frenzy.

• Can MD's be used for anything other than music files?
• How many MD's do I need to carry around if I want my whole library with me (10000 songs)?
• Does it transfer music faster than Firewire or USB2?
• Does it support Playlists? Playlists on the go?
• How many jukeboxes/players support ATRAC3?
• Are there any other applications for MD players that give it some PDA abilities?

What will be interesting is to see how Sony deals with consumers moving towards more widely accepted standards while it contuinues to suck RIAA ass with things like ATRAC3 and Open Magic Gate. Times like this Sony probably wishes it never got into content.

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology ?????

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple co creates/researches with Toshiba and apparently now with Hitachi

Please produce evidence that Apple had anything to do with the R&D of these hard drives.

Apple simply bought up most of the factory capacity to ensure that they had a form-factor advantage.

Good News for Apple and HP

[LinuxMacWin]

Not only does it give them bigger mindshare in the music (songs, hardware) market, it also sets up a partnership for future digital hub initiatives. My guess is HP and Apple might cross-license many technologies. Guess which machine will come preloaded with iPhoto or another "i" product the day their windows compatibility is announced.

Consider yourself corrected

[eroyce]

No, this will be Apple Design, Apple Tech, HP Name.

Re:First post

[Anonymous Coward]

What is going on with all these 'is it good or is it whack' comments ... are they good or are they whack?

Re:Behold... the thread of HP iPod naming suggesti

[Archangel Michael]

PodPaqer?

Or is that too Risque?

Makes me think.

[the web]

1. Invent iPod
2. License to HP and Partner with AOL
3. ...
4. World Domination

uPod?

[Doc Ruby]

I wonder if this iPod/iTMS licensee will fare any better than UMAX, which licensed MacOS to sell Mac clones. Apple revoked UMAX's license, and has kept their monopoly on Mac HW & OS as their central business model. If Jobs has given up his Mac monopoly of iTMS for a Windows client, admittedly cutting into the marketing demand for Macs, and iTunes is a lossleader to sell iPods, where is his traditional tyrannical need for market control? Is Apple getting out of the computer market, and morphing into a horizontally and vertically integrated consumer electronics retailer to compete with Dell?

This is not the same at all

[amichalo]

The mac clones were not produced by Apple for the cloners, they were licensed the OS and the chips they needed to run them and were responsible for the components and specs of the devices themselves.

Not comparing apples to Apples

Re:This is not the same at all

[Anonymous Coward]

Acutally, Apple manufactured the motherboards in many of the clone machines. Furthermore, 100% of the chipsets were manufactured by Apple.

This is why they really weren't "clones" -- in most cases they were exactly identical to the Apple models, except for the cases.

Re:First post

[Anonymous Coward]

they are gooooooode!

Profit Margins?

[Carrion Creeper]

I thought the iTunes hardware (aka iPod) was the only part Apple was making money on...

Oh yeah: in other news Apple has made it a requirement that Apple itself will do all battery servicing for iTunes compatible devices. (that's better!)

amazing

[SweetAndSourJesus]

You seem to have deftly avoided every single fact in the article.

Re:amazing

[Anonymous Coward]

I was thinking the same thing while reading that comment. The level of 180 degree wrongness is astounding.

Re:Carly and post-feudalism

[placeclicker]

* Creative labor jobs outsourced, America left with pure labor or pure creative jobs.

I thought China was taking care of those jobs..

YAWN

[Anonymous Coward]

This is not news. This is like saying "Apple is selling iPods at Best Buy."

It sounds like HP is just soldering an HP logo on the outside of a completely unaltered iPod. Same shape, same guts, same software. Different color? Apple is already doing multiple colors for the minipod and engravings for the iPod.

Why shouldn't anyone sell their own corporate-logo iPod like cheap pencils at a car rental?

Re:Apple's New Business Plan

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you ever had an original fucking thought in your whole life? Someone says Apple you say iPod battery, ready. Fijian Apples..... Speak monkey speak.

HP & OS X?

[32bitwonder]

I wonder. It's long been speculated that Apple may some day bring OS X to the x86 platform. It's technically feasible and has most likely already been proven so. OS X is now at a stage where it's stable and reached a point where even the die-hard OS 9 users can't avoid it any longer - and has essentially become what OS X should've been in the first place. They are however still selling product to the converted - and this is where iTunes comes in. It all starts with introducing iTunes to Windows users. Windows users use iTunes and soon realise that Apple can write some fantastic software. It's free, without ads and it works famously. Apple then decides to partner with HP to sell an HP branded iPod to those Windows users who still can't get themselves to buy an Apple branded iPod even though it will work with Windows. An HP iPod on the other hand will be easier for them to swallow - it's all about establishing a comfort factor. Once the HP pod starts getting more glowing reviews and iTunes becomes even more prevelent on Windows desktops, Apple and HP would be in a great position to produce HP branded computers (x86?) running OS X - as by that time they'd have established their market. HP has the manufacturing and cabibility to pull this off whereas it's doubtful that Apple does, esp with a potentially different platform.

Re:HP & OS X?

[Sjobeck]

If any one from Apple is reading, I'd use it immediately. I'd also think about moving away from Windows on an even larger scale. Wow. What an idea.

Re:HP & OS X?

[amichalo]

Apple Doesn't make money off the OS, they make money off the hardware. There is no reason to port OS X to the x86 platform. Especially when the G5 is a faster chip and their new architecture is butter than Intel's.

Apple made the decision, probably before OS X 10.0 was released, not to switch to the x86. With people switching to Apple in a slow by steady fassion and all those who haven't switched drooling for a Mac to run OS X, there is no reason why they should.

Re:HP & OS X?

[aristotle-dude]

Your right, they could join the likes of Be Inc and NeXT which made the switch to X86. Oh wait, they are dead and latter one got rolled into Apple.

Steve Jobs already got bit in the butt with your idea once already at NeXT.

Incidently, many former Be Inc employees also work at Apple now. I don't think you would get much support from them for your idea.

Re:HP & OS X?

[laird]

"It's long been speculated that Apple may some day bring OS X to the x86 platform."

Remember, Apple shipped "Rhapsody" for x86 to developers. And, um, it's been credibly "rumored" that Apple is maintaining the MacOS X code based on x86.

Re:HP & OS X?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice spelling... Of course, Apple does make a butter computer.

Re:HP & OS X?

[soft_guy]

Why not just make HP branded PowerPC clones?

This idea keeps coming up and it keeps being a stupid idea. If Apple gets out of the hardware business, that's it for them. If they clone the Mac out, they're back where they were in 1996 having to compete with companies that don't have an R&D budget.

Why cut your own throat?

Re:HP & OS X?

[tgibbs]

It's long been speculated that Apple may some day bring OS X to the x86 platform.

Apple reportedly seriously considered this at one time, although if they had done so, it would probably have been for an x86-based Mac, and incompatible with Wintel systems. The idea made sense when Apple didn't have access to PowerPC processors that could compete with x86. But with the G5 now competitive, and strong prospects for future speed increases, the chance of an x86 port of OSX has diminished to near zero.

Re:HP & OS X?

[Anonymous Coward]

There is absolutely zero chance that Apple will sell OS X for x86, not with the PowerPC 970 and upcoming PowerPC 980 chips equaling or exceeding Intel's and AMD's chips.

Re:HP & OS X?

[burns210]

three words: NEVER, GONNA & HAPPEN.

Licensing OS X for x86, god, that just rekes of a bad idea. One of the first things Jobs did when he returned: killed the mac clones.

*Apple is a hardware company*, they make kickass software to sell kickass hardware (iLife sells iMacs, iTMS sells iPods...) They don't want to get rid of their BIGGEST MONEY MAKER by letting HP sell all the hardware on lowend boxes, and slapping macos on their... You can't keep the 'it just works' ideals of the mac that way, and Steve Jobs wouldn't allow it.

Re:HP & OS X?

[Nadnerb]

The thing about the Apple OS (any of them) is that it is designed to work on Apple-produced hardware. The reason Windows has so many problems is that Microsoft can't really predict what kind of hardware you will be installing it on. They can't even be sure which processor you are going to use, so they have to have all sorts of contingency code that doesn't get adequately tested on every one of the thousands of hardware setup possibilities. Apple's OS is made to run on Apple's hardware...why compromise with a jury-rigged Athlon?

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology ?????

[Archangel Michael]

Apple's license for the Firewire name doesn't cost any money. It is free to use as long as you follow licensing requirements. The change was made as a direct or indirect response to Sony's iLink trade name for the same device.

The result is Sony now uses "Firewire", and iLink is gone.

MacWorld presence?

[amichalo]

Odd this wasn't announced on Tuesday at the Keynote.

Anyone at MacWorld have any insight into this announcement? Any HP folks there with info on:
- capacity
- pricing
- availability
- naming

Oh yeah, and Ogg Vorbis support .. oh oh oh .. Yeah Ogg Vorbis rulez ... spooge spooge spooge

Re:Carly and post-feudalism

[Enucite]

Yeah, last time I needed my car fixed I just shipped it to China. ;)

An iPod for self loathing Americans!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is for people who want an iPod, but prefer that their documentation and support is done from India.

seriously though

[gr8gatzby]

if you were a pirate, you know what would be the one thing that would really make you mad? Treasure chests with no handles.

Buying technology isn't a bad thing...

[zgwortz962]

In defense of HP (what a weird position to be in... ;), it's probably a very good move on their part, and it's an awesome boost for Apple. Remember, all of these big computer hardware companies (HP, Dell, Apple, Sony, and so on...) are in the business of providing what their customers want. Traditionally, consumers stick with a brand - people who buy HP computers also tend to buy their other stuff from HP if available. But it's bloody expensive to build hardware and compete in all the market sectors that exist. So what you do is focus on the sectors you are good at, and rebrand hardware from other manufacturers in the sectors you don't want to spend your R&D money on. Which is what HP is doing here with the iPod - they're simply having Apple make iPods for them with the HP logo and color scheme. And both companies win -- HP provides the music player they need to keep their customers in the fold, and Apple sells lots more iPods without much effort on their part at all. HP probably also gets a big discount on the cost of the iPod (cutting Apple's profit margins a bit), but Apple gets a boatload of new iTunes, iTMS, and Quicktime users in the bargain. Looks like a big win-win situation to me... -->Zgwortz

Not so obvious: HP will undercut Apple's pricing

[iamhassi]

"It seems obvious that part of the licensing deal would stipulate that HP cannot undercut Apple's pricing. I would be shocked to see any HP models with anything but the same capacities as Apple's at the same prices. And if anything, they'll be physically bigger, or won't look as nice. Apple's going to keep the high ground somehow."

Then prepare to be shocked: Apple licensed out the MacOS back in the mid to late 90s and overnight several clone manufactures popped up. The machines didn't look as good as Apples but they were much cheaper, roughly 25% cheaper. Apple lost lots of money on the deal.

I have no doubt we'll see HP hPods in the same capacities of iPods for half the cost. Might not look as nice, but I never considered a mp3 player to be a fashion statement.

It's about the codec

[leenoble_uk]

I can't be bothered reading all those comments to see if anyone else has made the point already. I came late to this party.
I think it has a little more to do with getting AAC out there as the standard instead of WMP.
People have been complaining for months how the iPod is incomatible with other music stores and how all the other manufacturers are using WMA audio alongside MP3 and they don't want WMA to become the standard.
Looks like Apple found a way to increase the viability of AAC as THE alternative.

I wuv MicroChannel!

[Thud457]

"if they had allowed licensing of their products in the 1980s like IBM did,"

IBM didn't allow anything.

They legally couldn't stop the flood of clones from the market. They then tried closing the barn after the horse was out with MicroChannel, but couldn't come up with a compelling reason for people to pay extra for vendor lock-in.

And now you have companies like Phoenix pushing DRM in the BIOS. Oh, the irony!

But will it do my calc homework?

[DaleBob]

Will the HP iPod use reverse polish notation?

Re:But will it do my calc homework?

[Longjmp]

Almost... You will be forced to listen to the music backwards.

HPiPods (pronounced hippy pods)

[5.11Climber]

Got a nice ring to it doesn't it?

The fat kid that can't catch the bus.

[Anonymous Coward]

By all means this is great for Apple. As for HP, their the fat kid that can't catch the bus. First they were at the front of the bus, then slowly moved to the back, then missed the bus, only now trying to catch the bus. HP seems to be behind in every aspect.

So HP one day realized this online music thing and portable music players were going to be hot, but by the time they figured it out, they were already left behind. So now to save face they try to leap frog with Apple?

This tells me HP, isn't in this for the long haul.

What Apple gains

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple really needs a low end player keep iTunes above Windows Media devices. They know the huge problems of not having enough market share. But they are serious about branding. They want to be where BMW is. They effectively don't make low end products. So they will sell it through HP to keep from diluting the Apple brand.

Did HP really have a choice?

[amichalo]

Now that the news has sunk in a few minutes, I am not so certain HP had a lot of better options.

They are already
(1) fighting off loosing market share to Dell
(2) managing a HUGE merger with Compaq (these things take years to work themselves out)
(3) spending tons in R&D with the iPaq

When HP sat down, they had a few options

The WMA way:
(1) Go with the WMA music store everyone else has and try to differentiate, knowing that at $0.99, the service is basically break even
(2) Build a player in house - a huge R&D expense (and risk) should the solution not work out when they launch head to head with Dell that isn't going through restructuring, has a huge market share, and doesn't have the iPaq taking R&D dollars.

The Apple way:
(1) recognize no one is teamed up with the market leader and WHY THE HECK SHOULDN'T WE!
(2) instead of trying to improve on what 31% of the entire MP3 market has already said they wanted by purchasing an iPod, just rebrand the damn thing like IBM did with the Palm III and be done with it.

The Apple way is less risk (and less money in HP's pocket) but if it turns out to be a fad, then haven't spend tens of millions in R&D and they can walk away. If it works out great, then five years from now, they can build their own in-house if they think they can do it better than Apple.

This is a HUGE win for HP and I bet it has Michael Dell slappin' his head sayin "I could'a had a V8!"

No it was unlicensed clones that almost killed...

[voss]

them. Had apple been getting $100 per machine for Apple OS and apple hardware rights...you better believe Apple would be in a a stronger position. If Mac Clones were making up 25% of the market and Apple was getting 10% pure profit cash for everyone of them, Apple would be a much stronger position. Plus Apple could still make its own hardware, and let the clones cover the commodity end.

Real supports iPods

[WatertonMan]

I didn't see any mention of the even bigger iPod news story. Real is launching a competitor to iTMS that like Apple uses AAC and thus supports iPods. (Indeed iPods are the only players I know of that support it) Real Networks

This is big for Apple. First of iTMS is a loss leader so competitors aren't that big a deal unless the recording industry gets their heads out of their asses, promotes downloads, and standardizes on a few outlets. (No sign of that happening) Anyway, Real will end up selling more iPods for Apple.

Of course this all makes sense. Real is getting hit from Microsoft's player as well as the success of iTunes/iTMS. Unless they get something going, even at a loss, they may disappear in a few years. So they've got to come up with an iTunes/iTMS competior -- likely supporting video unlike iTunes. Will it work? It's hard to say. The old RealJukebox from a few years back was my favorite player but became dated quickly and then was killed in favor of a subscription based RealOne. Plus most other iTMS competitors haven't done well. And there are more coming including one from Sony. Meanwhile Apple's system is garnering the best reviews, despite heavy marketing from companies like Napster. With the new Pepsi ad compaign I don't see anyone toppling them.

But perhaps they can manage to be the Pepse to Apple's Coke. (Yea, ironic, isn't it?) Right now iTMS and others may not make money. But three or four years from now the market may shift such that this becomes the standard distribution channel and bandwidth becomes such that you can make more money at it. Look at Amazon. How long did they lose money?

Re:Real supports iPods

[suchire]

Sorry, but Real's music store won't support iPods. Read the article: "For example, both RealNetworks and iTunes will distribute songs encoded in the AAC format, but Apple's iPod will not be able to play Helix-wrapped songs unless Apple licenses that technology."

Licensing makes sense

[sjbe]

Wait and watch how iMacs and such won't be licensed out. Jobs is probably taking medication to avoid exploding while HP makes stuff based on Apple technology.

Licensing out the technology for iPods and iTMS makes a tremendous amount of sense because they are dangerously close to being commodity products. There already are competing and very similar products for both services, many of which are of at least acceptable quality. Apple probably has the better products right now (hence their price premium) but there is little reason to believe that their current technology advantage is sustainable. They are the first movers, but our good friends at Microsoft have proven time and again how little that really means. Apples computers are different enough to avoid much of the direct competition but I would propose that the iPod and iTMS do not share this advantage.

So what can Apple do to combat this inevitable erosion of marketshare due to competition? Either they have to keep some form of value advantage (such as features not available elsewhere), have network effects which make switching other services less attractive or they have to scale the business to gain cost efficiencies from economies of scale/scope.

Apple appears to be doing a little of all three. They keep improving the iPod and iTMS which gives them a technology advantage for now. I do not believe this is sustainable in the long run (lots of other smart engineers out there) but it gives them good margins and a big head start. They've got a better mousetrap but that is only useful to a point.

By producing a Windows iPod, making it work with iTMS and licensing it to HP they are trying to build up network effects that make them the platform of choice. It's the same reason everyone chooses Microsoft Office; not because it is great, but because everyone else has it. Again I'm not conviced that the network effects here are the strongest, but if "everyone" buys iPods, that will make iTMS more attractive and vice versa. HP will undoubtable sell more so we might see people buying iPods and using iTMS because their family and friends use them. Not clear, but possible.

The other advantage of licensing to HP is they gain some economies of scale/scope. HP will sell more, making Apple's per-unit costs better, meaning they can fight low cost competition more effectively. The scariest opponent for Apple here is Microsoft because they can bundle with Windows and gain instant economies of scale and they have a much bigger war chest than Apple. If apple can sign up a few of the major OEMs (Dell, Toshiba, IBM, etc) to the same deal as HP, then Apple will be less vulnerable to Microsoft, though it would still be a problem.

In short, licensing iPods and iTMS makes a lot of sense. They don't need/want to do it for their computers because they are not easily duplicated and have significant strategic protection beyond simply the hardware and software. iPods and iTMS are much more vulnerable to competition and need to be treated as the different business it is.

Re:Licensing makes sense

[iSwitched]

Thank you for one of the most lucid posts I've ever read on Slashdot. Clearly you've studied a little business with your CS, or vice versa. Welcome to the minority here who have.

Again, very well said. Wish I had points today.

Re:Licensing makes sense

[Drakonian]

Well thought out and well said. An insightful analysis.

Re:Licensing makes sense

[Anonymous Coward]

I do not believe this is sustainable in the long run (lots of other smart engineers out there) ...

This would be true if iTMS, and to a much less extent the iPod, were strictly an engineering issue. But it is not. Convincing the record companies to allow you to sell their material is pretty much 90% of the effort involed, and by the looks of it, it's constantly an uphill battle.

Re:Licensing makes sense

[prockcore]

Licensing out the technology for iPods and iTMS makes a tremendous amount of sense

True, but that doesn't mean Steve Jobs won't be having a heart attack about it.

Scrollwheels make a lot of sense.. but no matter how much sense they make, you'll never see one on a powerbook as long as Jobs has his way.

Re:Behold... the thread of HP iPod naming suggesti

[amichalo]

iDontInvent

Definition of Fickle

[Anonymous Coward]

Booo!!! HP is evil for shipping off jobs.

-- 2 hours later --

Yeah!!! HP is so great for joining forces with Apple.

Re:Definition of Fickle

[laird]

"Booo!!! HP is evil for shipping off jobs.

-- 2 hours later --

Yeah!!! HP is so great for joining forces with Apple."

Don't you mean:

Booo!!! HP is evil for shipping off jobs.

-- 2 hours later --

Yeah!!! HP is so great for joining forces with Jobs.

Patenty goodness buried in the press release

[LionMage]

I submitted a similar article earlier today, but I guess I didn't beat the person who posted this article. However, one point that I made in my submission, and that nobody has made here: Check the press release. Notice something? Apple is claiming that the "Allowance" feature of the iTunes Music Store is patent pending. This smacks of the One Click patent that Amazon.com secured. Obligatory call for prior art examples goes here. :-)

Re:Patenty goodness buried in the press release

[Frac]

This smacks of the One Click patent that Amazon.com secured.

Do you mean smack in the same way how no one has yet to discover prior art to invalide Amazon.com's patent, so Apple's patent is probably unique and valid too?

Seriously, will the anti-patent zealots actually try to tear apart the specific claims in a patent before calling them invalid? Because ultimately, that's what matters.

Obligatory call for prior art examples goes here. :-)

Why are you calling on others? If you believe there's prior art, why aren't you looking for it yourself?

Re:Patenty goodness buried in the press release

[innate]

Apple has played a role in legitimizing the one-click patent. They have in fact licensed the one-click patent from Amazon, for use on their web site and now in the iTunes Music Store.

Perhaps Amazon will be interested in licensing "Allowances".

Re:Patenty goodness buried in the press release

[LionMage]

Apple has played a role in legitimizing the one-click patent.

Much to my chagrin.

Re:Patenty goodness buried in the press release

[LionMage]

Do you mean smack in the same way how no one has yet to discover prior art to invalide Amazon.com's patent, so Apple's patent is probably unique and valid too?

Like the One-Click patent, I think this Allowances patent (well, pending patent) falls under the category of "obvious," and therefore shouldn't be patentable. There actually have been several people who have pointed out potential prior art on One-Click, only to be shot down on a nit-picking technicality. Since you seem to have a disdain for nit-picking, perhaps you'll modify your position accordingly. But probably not.

Seriously, will the anti-patent zealots actually try to tear apart the specific claims in a patent before calling them invalid? Because ultimately, that's what matters.

Pardon me, but what's the fucking claim? The concept of giving your child an allowance has been around since before I was born. The iTunes Music Store's Allowances feature is simply one implementation of this concept, but the patent application was probably written to be overly broad, so anyone trying to implement anything similar will have to license the patent.

Back in the good old days, when the USPTO actually did a real job and didn't just rubber stamp every patent application that slid by, such a patent application would be rejected on the grounds that it is trivial and obvious. Neither One-Click nor Allowances would survive culling if that standard were applied today.

Why are you calling on others? If you believe there's prior art, why aren't you looking for it yourself?

Ah yes, the stereotypical humorless Slashdot geek who, true to his psychological make-up, misses the mildly humorous wording of "Obligatory call for prior art examples goes here," and then goes a step farther and misses the smiley face immediately following.

But, stepping back for a moment and answering your question at face value, I'll simply say that I think it's a waste of my time to look for prior art for this. It's not my fucking job, and nobody is paying me to do this. If I need to create a web store that implements such a feature, I'll make a business decision at that time and decide whether it's cheaper to hire someone to find prior art and challenge the patent, or to simply license this absurd patent.

Regardless, this idiocy has a finite life span, so in the long run, it doesn't matter that such things are patented. It is, however, a nuisance to small Web retailers in the short run.

Thanks for Making US people jobless

[SlashingComments]

Yes, Don'y deny it. We, in our life time will see US economic power diminished and treated as a country with "great ideas and smart people" but no capability to do anything -- oops I thought that's what was said about India about 10 year's back.

All the harrasement Indian IT professionals faced from US Govt ( NOT from US people - US Govt. and US People come from two different planet it seems ) during legit business visit with endless things like H1, B1, L1 all the crap where terrorist country like Pakistan were sending all the talibans in visitor visa indicates the US Govt have started loosing focus on what's good for the common people.

... Whatever, Point is US is going down slowly but surely and the common people got the wrong end of the stick !

Like why fix Iraq when you can't fix roads in NY ?? Charity begins at home - I thought !

PodLiant

[heychris]

PodLiant

That's right, the world's first rackmount iPod. Fully fault-tolerant, so all of the people who worry about iPods skipping while they're jogging can give it a rest.

However, it still won't support Ogg...

CC

HP Outsourcing again

[Karadryel]

Nice to see that Carly's just outsourcing her "innovation" down the street, instead of having to go all the way to India for it ...

Re:Carly and post-feudalism

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, where's my spelling?

Re:Carly and post-feudalism

[iSwitched]

Not saying I agree with the parent, but I believe his point was that at the rate we're going, you won't have a car, 'cause you'll be some millionaires bitch.

Re:Behold... the thread of HP iPod naming suggesti

[Myopic]

Free dime bag with your MP3 player? Sweet!

Steve Jobs craftiness

[pemulius]

When it comes to the computer market, Apple struggles daily to try to reach 5% market share. Its a constant struggle and marginal gains have been made in the last years. The advent of digital music sales has created a new market that is akin to the wild-west where companies are scrambling to stake their claims.

With giants the likes of Microsoft jumping into the frey, it is important to establish a dominant position. Microsoft who is very bullyish has had proven success with growing horizontally and cornering key emergant markets. Them entering the console / video game entertainment market shows that Microsoft knows where the growth is and responds aggressively to corner that market. By allying with HP, Apple can hedge its assets by establishing themselves as leaders in the digital musical delivery market. Beyond providing Apple with excellent brand exposure, it provides Apple with a market where they can achieve good growth.

Re:Carly and post-feudalism

[jdiggans]

* Creative labor jobs outsourced, America left with pure labor or pure creative jobs.

And yet thanks to Bush's recent immigration policy shift, pure labor jobs will be handed over to a 'temporary workforce' culled from nearby foreign lands willing to do jobs 'Americans don't want' which should be read as 'Jobs that don't pay a living wage.'

Ugh. Corporate America gets bolder by the day.
-j

Just curious

[Anonymous Coward]

What is their technology culture, anyway?

If you can't reply, post a journal.

Re:Just curious

[mother pussbucket]

Big Fun!

Sincerely,
Hello Kitty.

Re: Don't forget about. . .

[Anonymous Coward]

QuickTime. This is a huge win for QT preloaded on HP consumer computers as well.

Licensing

[TheKidWho]

Remember guys, apple will still be making money off of licensing.

Re: Unfortunately, you are wrong. . .

[Anonymous Coward]

The Pepsi promotion begins in February and runs for 60 days. The HP iPod isn't slated for release until summer.

Prediction of HP product - true Media PC

[SuperKendall]

Imagine if you will this product - a PC, with iTunes built in AND a CF/card reader AND an HP photo printer, all in one case.

It sounds stupid at first to build a printer into a device like that but I really think it would attract a lot of users that wanted a simple solution. It would gain a lot of mindshare for HP which currently has very little in the PC space (among consumers)...

As precident I'll note that Epson is releasing TV's with built in printers and card readers, where you can browse you images on TV then print them right there! If Epson can do that then a PC built for photo work is much less insane.

Re:No it was unlicensed clones that almost killed.

[p4ul13]

I remember the clone run, but didn't know the whole reasons that Apple pulled the plug on it. I remember that it had to do with them losing lots of money on the licensing, but don't think I knew at the time (let alone now) why they were losing money on it.

You say that it was because of unlicensed clones in the market; I don't suppose you have a resource that tells that story? I would think that if there were unlicensed clones then they would have sued the pants off them.

/. news for idiots "people who cant read"

[eadint]

This is a very good thing and ive been waiting for it to happen if you look at the aac license and the way apple worked it with the *AA its the least restrictive media out there. the problem has been that no other mp3 players can play it, this opens the door to dell, wall-mart and iriver to adopt the aac codecs into their systems. then if you want to use itunes, you can use your iriver, or wall-shit player or whatever, this is a very good thing, from what ive seen the wmp player is draconian at best. i would predict that in 1 year the aac codec will be on other mp3 players and maybe there will be one for linux.

if your gonna mod me down " fuck you very much, you pee-brained little shit, i got bad karma because the moderators are all on crack and they have the feelers of homosexual lesbians with an inferiority complex and a limp, i now consider bad karma to be a sign of intelligence."

Re:/. news for idiots "people who cant read"

[Anonymous Coward]

Gee...I don't see why anyone might mod you down...Dude...bitter mode off!

Re:HP branded iPod manufactured by Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

"newbies might not realize this is an Apple product, not an HP product"

Except for the prominent Apple logo, one of the most well recognized corporate symbols on the planet, that will appear at boot-up of the HP branded iPod.

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology ?????

[Anonymous Coward]

Please produce otherwise - A Pixo Rep once told me that Apple had a lot to do with the investment and R7D in the whole package INCLUDING the hard drive.

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology ?????

[Anonymous Coward]

Incorrect, as management in Belkin (former job - two months ago) - Belkin paid 32/100 of a cent for every instance on a package or product that we used "firewire" and another 32/100th of a cent for the Mac OSX logo. We laso had to pay for logo licensing kits and for a number of our employees to be developers. Membership there is $3K per person!!!

Apple's going to control a layer! Yes!

[jordandeamattson]

In a classic HBR (Harvard Business Review) article back in the early 90s, the domination of the computer industry by Microsoft and Intel was predicted.

The foundation of this article was the position that control of a lower layer in the stack allowed you to extract significnatly more revenue higher up in the stack. Microsoft by controlling the OS could extract revenue for applications; Intel by controlling the processor could extract revenue for support chips and logic boards.

This has turned out to be a "law" and has worked to the advantage of both these companies.

It now looks like Apple is working to grab the "Music Sales and Distribution" layer, and it looks like this will allow them to extract revenues they previously were not able to get.

Interesting...gives hope for Apple down the road...

Yours,

Jordan

PS. Love my iPod!

Re:Apple's going to control a layer! Yes!

[Johnny Mnemonic]

I would be interested to read that article. Because, they way you described it, it doesn't describe why NeXT, Be, and even Apple have (relatively) failed in the marketplace, although they are all OS creators, too. The fact that you need Apple's OS to use Apple applications (such as Final Cut Pro) sure doesn't guarantee anything, if you prefer to use another application on another OS at the end of the da.

In fact, history proves this wrong: Apple had the OS, and MSFT had the Office suite for the Mac even before it was on Windows--so Apple should have been more successful, as they were "lower in the layer".

Re:Apple's going to control a layer! Yes!

[burns210]

so apple will become the dominant player in the media market. Positioning themselves as the digital hub provider Steve has wanted to be for several years now. Since i only see this expanding, what should we expect from further buyouts and developments in music and movie making?

There were rumors for apple to buy one of the major record labels(vivendi, was it), this would give them a cheap access to the many thousands of artists it would now control(taking a bigger cut of that 99 cent deal than they normally would), while also give steve a better opportunity to open Apple Records(yes, i know of the cotract they would be breaking, humor me) to sign more indepedent artists and smaller labels like they did with the iTMS deal.

And what about Pixar, or Apple's highend video software? Could we see Apple merging with Pixar, or developing the Pixar animation software entirely? This would give Apple a huge customer of Disney, that is basicly following Pixar's every move, to this point.

So basicly, Apple has a lot of opportunity to OWN the video and music making software market. They could be THE company for all software to write produce create and deploy music or movies on for the forseeable future.

P.S. If this pipedream ever happened(I bet money it won't, btw), I would forsee a mac-favorable pricing deal similar to what Steve has done with other highend apps. Sell the APP for the thousands it would normally cost on the windows version, but sell the mac version for half that. if you save 2+ grand on the mac version, and save on all following upgrades, it pays to port your studio to all macs in software costs alone.... Thoughts, anyone?

Re:Apple's going to control a layer! Yes!

[Anonymous Coward]

You're not getting it. The article was written in the 90s, when Microsoft already dominated the OS layer and Intel already dominated the CPU layer. The argument was that dominance of a layer leads to dominance of higher layers.

HP-Invent... my ass

[netsavior]

I heard from a slightly credable insider HP as a company is trying to compete in all things dell has (like a personal vendeta type thing?) in this light, it makes sense that they would just brand an iPod to compete with the (way cheaper) dell DJ This article makes me laugh because HP's slogan is "Invent" not "License and private label"

Re:No it was unlicensed clones that almost killed.

[Anonymous Coward]

The big reason the Mac Clones failed was because Apple was doing ALL of the software & hardware R&D and only charging $50/machines for the licenses.

Apple thought the clone companies would expand their market, but instead they started advertising in MacWorld and went right for Apple's core graphics market, and left Apple to make the low-margin consumer machines (Performas).

Furthermore, PowerComputing was selling their clones at loss!

So, the clones were doing everything to hurt Apple and nothing to help them. Apple informed the cloners that they wanted to up the license fee to $300. and Power said they were going to go into bankruptcy, and that was pretty much the end.

Had the clone plan actually been executed better, it could have been very good for Apple's marketshare and their finances.

By international you mean...

[Iowaguy]

By more international, do you mean by moving all Hp's operations overseas?

How not like the clones?

[jordandeamattson]

Folks are probably wondering how this isn't like the clones in terms of what it will do for Apple?

Well, to put it bluntly, when Apple got into cloning originally, it had a sub-5% market share.

In this business (Download Music Sales & Distribution), they have a 70% marketshare (according to Nielen).

It is amazing what a position of strength can do for you!

Yours,

Jordan

Re:How not like the clones?

[Anonymous Coward]

More importantly:

Cloning = "Here's how to make it ... now go knock yourselves out!"

Reselling = "Pay us, and we'll make them for you to sell."

Apple are not licensing the iPod's design and technology to HP. They're simply selling custom iPods to HP for them to resell to their customers.

MusicMatch kicked to the curb??

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't HP have a deal with MusicMatch to distribute the MusicMatch Jukebox? And doesn't MusicMatch also have an online music store? Oof.

~~~~~~~
MUSICMATCH JUKEBOX SELECTED AS DEFAULT MEDIA PLAYER ON HP PAVILION AND COMPAQ PRESARIO COMPUTERS
-- Digital Jukebox Inventor Continues to Secure Default Jukebox Position Over the Competition --

SAN DIEGO - July 1, 2003 - MUSICMATCH, Inc., the global leader in personalized music software and services, today announced that its award-winning music player will now be included as the default media player on HP Pavilion and Compaq Presario desktop and notebook personal computers.

Full press release here.

Re:Go on

[rhetoric]

SURE!

I can't believe nobody has said this here...

[bennomatic]

What are they going to call it? The hPod?

Re:I can't believe nobody has said this here...

[bennomatic]

And if Gateway does the same thing, will it be the gPod?

Now we just need 23 more licencees...

Re:I can't believe nobody has said this here...

[Anonymous Coward]

what, you mean like the other 23 letters of the alphabet?

AAC and Fairplay thats what is about

[Anonymous Coward]

AAC and fairplay. Now 2 people are making AAC compatible Mp3 players. Anyone else? Gateway?

OGG DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

when OGG adds drm then music stores might consider adopting it. Since virtuall all online music for sale is DRM it cant be distributed in ogg. And if you own the music then you can encode it just as eaily in WMA or AAC without any DRM as you can in ogg or MP3 and no there wont be any difference in quality. What the fuck are you think about. What makes ogg better than AAC or WMA? Woul dit make you happy if someone wrote an open source AAC encoder? I'm sure its on the way though it hardly seems needed.

Re:OGG DRM

[steveha]

0) AAC doesn't have any DRM. Apple wraps AAC with DRM anyhow. Ogg Vorbis can be wrapped in DRM, easily.

1) What makes Ogg Vorbis better than AAC or WMA? Mainly, it's not covered by patents, so it is legal for people to write free versions. (There may be an open source AAC but it will still be covered by patents.)

steveha

Re:OGG DRM

[mabhatter654]

the point of OGG is that in the US most users aren't making "legal" mp3's due to the patents on the format encoding itself. Vorbis was a seperately developed and patented format that the creators willingly open sorced [because they came up with a new one to charge money for!] It's why you can't BUY a PC that can rip MP3's only play them...you always have to pay extra for the rippers...if more devices supported Ogg Vorbis we could easily distribue free software to rip CD's for personal use...and starve the patent hogs of MP3 for money in the process. MP3 may be cool, but with patents, it's redundant.. and apple uses ACC, windows uses wma... the only thing keeping it alive is monemtum...if something like the iPod could play Ogg files [perhaps even sneak some DRM into the iTunes/iPod combo to prevent swapping via iPod to keep suits happy] then MP3 would die pretty quickly.

Re:OGG DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm, I can buy a PC and put....iTunes on it, for free, to rip (as well as play & burn) MP3, AIFF or AAC. So, what's your point again now? Because iTunes seems to have made it meaningless.

Social Darwinism at its worst

[LionMage]

Joe Slashdot: just like everyone else "Keep the gov't off my back, man... but put it on HPs because they've found someone that can do my job for half the price. Fuck progress, I have a mountain of credit card debt to pay off."

They may have found someone to do the same job, but almost certainly not at the same level of competency. I've had some first-hand experience now with outsourcing work to India-based programmers, and I'm not that impressed. In the Java arena, asking an Indian programmer to do anything beyond a simple JSP page or a trivial Servlet is asking a lot. At least, that has been my experience. And these programmers want a lot of hand-holding -- i.e., so much specified up-front that the person writing the spec might as well write the code too.

Of course, most of the better programmers wind up filtering out of India and into the United States, in search of better wages and a better standard of living. How ironic.

Another issue I've run into is the language barrier. There's a real, tangible lack of understanding of some basic concepts, things that just don't seem to get across very well. This usually results in longer development cycles (which, when you factor in the latency induced by 24-hour round trip time for most e-mail exchanges, can be a real productivity killer), because what you get isn't exactly what you asked for. This becomes a creative exercise in learning to rephrase the same fscking request different ways until the guy on the other end just "gets it."

Evolve or die, simple as that. If you're [sic] skill level was only as high as your average India-based call center worker / HTML jockey you ain't all that skilled.

I'll agree to an extent. The problem is, it's not just call center jobs and web authoring anymore. More and more of the upper-tier programming jobs are being exported, to the point that a company might only keep one or two chief software architects (if that) in the United States, and have the rest done by code slingers working for peanuts overseas.

Of course, everyone keeps saying that the truly competent coders will always be able to find work Stateside, and that might be true. It just seems to me that the definition of "truly competent" seems to be shifting, or maybe it's the level of competency that's considered acceptable to get a given job done.

This Social Darwinism crap that conservatives always spout really turns my stomach. When the middle class has eroded to the point where there are no skilled workers left in the United States, who will remain to be the consumer of all the cheap goods and services that this global capitalist economy supposedly will provide?

When I was forced into bankruptcy by the dot-com implosion, and couldn't find decent steady work for over a year, only to eventually find a job that required me to do more work for about a third of the money that I used to make, even a $99 iPod would have been too expensive.

Take a lesson from Computer Science. Greedy algorithms don't always work best.

Disclaimer: I'm not in any way trying to turn this into a flame war about the theory of evolution. I'm talking about Social Darwinism, not biological evolution. Just to insure that nobody accuses me of straying too far off-topic.

Re:Social Darwinism at its worst

[FatRatBastard]

A couple of things: when the outsourced labor sucks (because of the reasons you state) that causes you to lose money / customers / reputation you stop doing it. For instance Dell. They just brought some of their call center work back to the states.

When I was forced into bankruptcy by the dot-com implosion, and couldn't find decent steady work for over a year, only to eventually find a job that required me to do more work for about a third of the money that I used to make, even a $99 iPod would have been too expensive.

Which means you were probably overpaid in the first place. That was one of the MAJOR problem of the dot.com boom: Labor squeeze, which begat wage inflation. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed some nice paydays as well, but let me ask you this: Did you save anything you made during the boom? Did you rent/buy the best you could afford, buy/lease a phat ride? Did you have all the latest toys (PS, state of the art computer, PDA, the entire Think Geek catalogue)? Did you party every night like you were Prince?

Considering you went bankrupt, unless you owned a house who's value plummeted or had an uninsured medical catastrophe, I suspect it was due to some wicked credit card debt.

Sorry, but the gravy train never lasts forever, and the world doesn't own anyone shit. Just because the cricket partied his ass off doesn't mean he gets to eat the ant's grain.

Re:Social Darwinism at its worst

[LionMage]

Which means you were probably overpaid in the first place. That was one of the MAJOR problem of the dot.com boom: Labor squeeze, which begat wage inflation.

Actually, no, it means that the job I was hired for was working for a company that was stingy and didn't want to spend top dollar for a competent person. To be fair, the type of work I was doing at this job was considerably different, and probably warranted a lower paycheck than what I'd been making previously... but not to the extent of the pay cut I wound up taking.

I might also point out that now, even in this shitty economy, my pay scale has risen to about 80% of what I was making before the dot-com bust. Because of the bankruptcy, I have less debt to service, and therefore my effective take-home pay (and thus, my disposable income) is higher.

On the other hand, I'm also working far harder than I ever did before the dot-com bust, with the possible exception of a stint I did at a start-up company that lasted almost two years. Then, as now, I find myself getting burned out. But I daren't jump ship, because jobs aren't plentiful for programmers of any kind on Arizona right now (except maybe VB programmers, but even that market is shriveling).

Considering you went bankrupt, unless you owned a house who's value plummeted or had an uninsured medical catastrophe, I suspect it was due to some wicked credit card debt.

It was mostly credit card debt, combined with a crushing car loan that I should have refinanced far sooner. At least I had the sense to get rid of the SUV when gas prices climbed back up above $1 per gallon and stayed there. Too bad the loan for the Eclipse was obtained through Keybank.

Chapter 13 bankruptcy has definitely helped me restructure my finances. The bankruptcy let me save my house (which is modest, a mere $75,000 home when I bought it, 800 square feet, certainly not a "phat pad") and effectively refinance my car.

Although I may have been overpaid before the dot-com bust, I certainly don't feel overpaid now. I have, however, learned my lessons. I'm trying to save more and plan for cyclic down-turns in my industry. Not that I ever "partied every night like Prince," but I did buy a lot of gadgets and other luxuries that I shouldn't have; that's stopped as well. Everything now has to serve a function, or else it had better fall within the constraints of my entertainment budget.

One last bit: Your comments about what happens when outsourced labor turns out to suck are spot-on. My current employer had to massively scale back their outsourcing to India when they realized that these jokers weren't up to most of the tasks we wanted them to do. (That, and their estimates on time-to-completion for a given set of tasks were ridiculously inflated, effectively negating any cost savings from paying lower hourly wages.) The Dell example you cite is perfect.

Re:Why? [I know, OT]

[madcow_ucsb]

Um do I have to go drive over to Fremont and take a picture of it? It's *defintiely* an HP, I bought it for her when I interned for Agilent and got in on the HP employee purchase program.

And it *Definitely* has that sticker on it. I've never had to go into it, so it's still stuck right there on the back.

I also was working on a friend's ghetto old HP that we setup as a file server a month or so ago. Also had the sticker. I rember being disgusted as I tore it off. Both machines are from the 2001 timeframe.

I don't dispute that the gay packard bells had them. And I don't claim every HP has had them (I've only had the misfortune to deal with those two and I don't recall the model numbers). But I know beyond a doubt these two particular HPs are both HPs and both had that sticker.

Compaq invented, HP destroyed

[hirschma]

Compaq more of less invented the hard drive based portable music player.

I have one of the first sold, almost 6 years ago. Back then, it featured 10 hour battery life, gapless play (albums were ripped as one large mp3 with pointers), and open sourced PC client and drivers. It is still the golden standard for audio quality from such a device. No player out there has all of its technical features, still.

People were so excited when it first came out, delayed over a year (yes, this thing was ready to be sold in '96/'97), that the first units were bid as high as $2000 on mp3.com. My girlfriend, flush with dot.com bucks, bought me one.

So, what happened given the HP acquisition? What happened when a shipping product was so accutely sought after, people where paying 4x what Compaq originally sought to price it at? It was abandoned, licensed to a Korean company called Hango that had no marketing or R&D budget, and forgotten. The engineers on the project were sacked. Even the case was ugly, but the unit was (and still is) great. Given the time frame, the orginal is the size of two iPods wide.

HP could have had a platform and something like iTunes a long time ago. This is apparently the new HP.

Re:Compaq invented, HP destroyed

[Singen]

Interesting take. Now that you mentioned it I do remember the Compaq mp3 player, although as far as the time frame goes, I couldn't pin the device to more then 4 years ago.

Of course the Compaq device had two MAJOR flaws.

1. It was based on USB
2. It was ridiculously expensive at the time

One of the reasons why the iPod was succesful was that syncing the 20 Gb iPod does not take more than 8 hours(!). I guess Apple knows that good artists copy and great artists steal.

Re:Compaq invented, HP destroyed

[hirschma]

Well, if memory served (and it might not), there were pre-release models in 1998, with general availability in '99.

Keep in mind that had the product not been orphaned by Compaq, possibly due to the then upcoming merger with HP, it would have had faster transport to the host machine. USB1.1 was current when the thing came out way back. Not even sure if Firewire existed, but even if it did, it needed a costly licensing fee. The original prototype had ethernet, tho, but that was scrapped as being consumer unfriendly.

Yes, it was very expensive. It was also the first unit of its type, and it did not enjoy the economies of scale that production from a Compaq would have bestowed on it. Moreover, it shipped much later than it was supposed to, again because Compaq didn't see the wisdom of doing so.

The point is: Compaq/HP had something very special, and they neglected it to death.

Jonathan

But it's not the best thing to come out of HP

[TNLNYC]

... today...

Has anyone checked out LightScribe. While the Apple deal is interesting, I think the LightScribe story should get more play...

my god given right

[Anonymous Coward]

buying a hp ipod is like being a chicken and buying stock in KFC!
Wake up America. 90% are too stupid to care about there jobs!!!
Yes i am a American.

Apple's 1984 is a bit different...

[NotInTheBox]

I know it's a bit offtopic but did anyone notice that she is wearing a iPod? How about that for rewriting history? :)

http://www.apple.com/hardware/ads/1984/

(No, this is edited -- I've checked)

Re:Apple's 1984 is a bit different...

[soft_guy]

Uh, yeah. Jobs showed this during his MacWorld keynote and got big laughs on Tuesday.

Excellent

[RainbowSix]

Now you can save face and not have to lie about your iPod being a Pop Tart :)

Losing not loosing

[Anonymous Coward]

Alright buddy? Before you embarass yourself more.

Wherefore art thou Musicmatch?

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder what this means for Musicmatch? I think they have provided a HP-labeled version of the Musicmatch Jukebox for the past few years. So, they have lost the revenues from that. Plus, they lost the opportunity to get a major customer distributing their online store (they're currently powering the Dell music store).

Musicmatch is a private, venture-funded startup, so this has to hurt.

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology ?????

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe they kicked in some $$$, but I highly doubt that Apple owns any hard drive engineering talent.

Real does NOT support iPods

[wembley]

Real's AACs will be protected with their own proprietary "Helix" DRM, which is not readable by iPods.

Tunes from Real's store will NOT work on iPods.

Tunes from Apple's store WILL work in the new RealPlayer b/c it is calling out to QuickTime/iTunes to do the DRM work.

Re:Real does NOT support iPods

[soft_guy]

iPods do read other formats besides AAC. Just not Windows Media. Audible, for example, works with the iPod.

Re:Real does NOT support iPods

[wembley]

Yes, but iPods don't have the "Helix" DRM that Real will use.

Re:Real does NOT support iPods

[soft_guy]

OK. I don't really care. Real sucks anyway.

Re:Real does NOT support iPods

[wembley]

I know. I used to work at a company they acquired.

MP3 player?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think calling them 'MP3 players' is not an accurate description anymore. Sure, they can play MP3 files, but they can all play a variety of different formats, compressed or not.

Apple and Real are both pushing for a format change: AAC, instead of MP3.

Microsoft is aiming for a WMA adoption.

I suppose calling them 'Hard-Drive based music players' wouldn't be that far off; it's what they are.

'MP3 player' is a poor description and a legacy term that should be avoided.

Even 'HD player' would be preferable.

Re:MP3 player?

[NatasRevol]

Because they play hard drives?

How about just music players because....they play music. See the logic?

Re:MP3 player?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, because we're trying to differentiate the product from others. If you call it a 'music player,' then how do you know we're not talking about a Walkman? Or a Mini Disc? Or a portable CD player?

HP 19% Apple 3% in Q3-2003

[AHumbleOpinion]

According to the chart at http://www6.tomshardware.com/mobile/20031202/index .html HP has around 19% marketshare to Apple's 3%.

Re:HP 19% Apple 3% in Q3-2003

[Bob Davis, Retired]

That's not marketshare, that's percentage of new machines sold.

It's almost impossible to determine marketshare accurately. However, the service life for a Mac is, on average, thrice that of a PC - making attempts at calculating marketshare based on pure sales numbers a joke at best, and fraudulent at worst.

Re:HP 19% Apple 3% in Q3-2003

[Juanvaldes]

no way it's three times. I'd buy one and a half on average.

Re:HP 19% Apple 3% in Q3-2003

[Anonymous Coward]

>> However, the service life for a Mac is, on average, thrice that of a PC

From where did you get this data man? at the very least, people would use a PC for another 5 years(YMMV). Now, do you use 15 (3 X 5) year old mac ? I mean what software you run on top of these 15 year old ALMIGHTY PPC ? Dont be an idiot to make such erronous statments(I know mac fanboys will mod you up , but that doesnt mean its not BULLSHIT)

Re:HP 19% Apple 3% in Q3-2003

[overunderunderdone]

Valid point but what you are talking about is "installed base" which isn't quite the same as "market share". Market share is a flexible enough term that it *could* refer to installed base BUT most people use it to mean "percentage of new machines sold" it is, after all MARKET share.

Re:HP 19% Apple 3% in Q3-2003

[Anonymous Coward]

I got this data from firsthand experience, working in the field at businesses, Universities, and other installations. At the very MOST, businesses and academic institutions tend to use PCs for 2-3 years (on average 2 years) before they requisition new ones. Macintoshes, on the other hand, are often used for 5 or more years - there are still a LOT of Beige PowerMacs out there.

I don't know why I responded to an anonymous fucktard like yourself. I DO know that you know you were blowing smoke out your ass, though, hence the AC post.

Fucktard.

HP/Apple iPOD deal for Apple is about QT & iTM

[Anonymous Coward]

This deal means a lot of things to everyone... what this really means to HP and more to Apple is that Quicktime just became a default install along side Windows Media Player that is installed with every version of Windows XP.

This also means that iTMS and the MPEG 4 Audio file (AAC) is more widely used. In the end -- this solidifies MPEG 4 as the next open standard over MS proprietary WMA or WMV file formats.

This was a great win for everyone today!!! Bravo!

Take you Ogg Vorbis ...

[porky_pig_jr]

and shove it into you anal orifice.

The world is going MP4/AAC. Got it?

-1, Clueless

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod down

Compaq did this years ago

[Anonymous Coward]

Compaq's research labs created one of the best large capacity MP3 players around (Personal Jukebox - www.pjbox.com) which they then licensed to HanGo in Korea to build and sell. This was, oh, 4 or 5 years ago now (I've had mine since 2000), so they were a mile ahead of Apple. Shame HP seems to have missed that technology at merger time.....

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology ?????

[soft_guy]

Membership there is $3K per person!!!

I have one of these memberships. First, they are totally worth it. Second, they allow Apple not to lose so much money supporting developers.

You get a ticket for WWDC which normally costs between $1000 and $1500 per person. You get hardware discounts. You get 10 DTS support incidents. You get the developer mailings. I bet the cost of having WWDC is not offset by the ticket price. I bet the tickets cover maybe 50% of the cost or less.

3K per person isn't much at all in the grand scheme of things (despite the exclamation points).

Re:Why? [I know, OT]

[the_2nd_coming]

yes...go take a picture for me please.

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology ?????

[soft_guy]

Why do you doubt this? It's obvious to me that they would totally need this talent and it would be easy to acquire it. Think of how many out of business HD manufacturers there are in Silicon Valley. Plus, people move around between companies and get all sorts of experience.

I presently work for a company that makes data projectors. We don't make the lamps that go into them - we buy that part from someone else. Does that mean we don't have people who have the kind of engineering talent to design and engineer lamps? Of course we do! Otherwise, how would we be able to know which lamp to buy (ahead of time - anyone can recognize a disaster after it happens). We wouldn't know when they are feeding us a line of shit.

I'm sure they talk to this people on the phone, listen to their statements and ask intelligent questions. People with the right background know when to call bullshit on statements about whether something is possible or not, etc. Plus, they probably buy enough hard drives that they can call out requirements.

It is not that hard to hire someone with that kind of background and as an engineer who does work with hardware vendors I can easily see where that kind of expertise might be vital even if you are merely buying the hard drive from a vendor.

I used to work for another company where we needed a whole bunch of software folks who knew a lot about video cards. We were a small software company with no where near the budget that Apple has. Yet, we hired lots of people who had worked for NVidia, ATI, Matrox, etc. Some of these people had been senior engineers at those companies. It is not as hard as you think to get people with a needed skill.

What kind of experience do YOU have to be making that kind of statement anyway?

iPod vs MD: the number one digital music player?

[IronyChef]

Compare:

"Apple's iPod(TM), the number one digital music player in the world"

"Net MD Walkman recorders have been the top-selling digital music players for the past 18 months"

(Lest any USians sneer, MiniDisc is prevalent in Japan and at least somewhat more popular in Europe...)

Perhaps this is HP's counter to Dell?

[NeoBeans]

Consider this...

HP resells the iPod and iTMS to add value to their product lineup so that potential customers can do one-stop shopping for HP branded products (computer, printer, MP3 player, etc...) just like Dell does... but without the extra effort involved in trying to create a new product (like the Dell DJ) and a new service (Dell Music Store).

HP's product portfolio still looks good, but they are effectively outsourcing a consumer product and service to Apple.

Hmmm.

Given the earlier posts about HP outsourcing, this sounds like it's the norm for them..!

Strike "credibly" in the above post..

[soft_guy]

Ain't gonna happen.

Re:Strike "credibly" in the above post..

[laird]

While I agree that it's unlikely that Apple will _ship_ MacOS X for x86's, I'm fairly certain that they've been making sure that it compiles and runs on the x86. I certainly can't identify my source (they have rules, you know) so let's keep it as a speculation -- if you had an OS that was extremely portable and ran across a wide range of processors, you'd probably make sure that it kept running on all of those processors, even if you only shipped on one, in order to make sure that you kept your options open, right?

that better?

Re:Not so obvious: HP will undercut Apple's pricin

[jkabbe]

How are the clones analogous? There *would* be a good analogy if Apple had licensed the iPod OS along with the scroll-wheel patent.

But that hasn't happened. Apple will be making the iPods for HP.

this is step one towards liscensing OS X

[kraksmoka]

yes, you heard it here first. apple is eventually going to port their stuff to x86, all of it. and apparently, HP will be their first licensed manufacturer of HP OS X boxen. move over winbloze, mac's back!

The nice thing about this...

[rediguana]

... is that more companies will be able to access the HP iPod through the wholesale channel, whereas Apple distributors keep a very tight leash on those who are able to purchase the products at wholesale. This potentially means that HP could down the track be outselling Apple purely because a much greater number of stores will have access to the HP iPod. Should be interesting.

Re:Why? [I know, OT]

[DarkVader]

But is is a "warranty void" sticker?

I remember seeing stickers on HPs - but they were "quality seal" stickers. There was no voiding of warranty implied on them.

Can't HP do anything on it's own?

[Anonymous Coward]

First HP has to buy compaq and now it has to strike a deal with Apple. I'm not saying the deal itself is bad, but it seems like HP has to go to everyone else to get what they need. Maybe if they weren't busy sending jobs over seas they could spend some time making their own products that people want.

What's the matter Carly? Not enough time to innovate when you are busy screwing your own people?

There is no aspect of the United States prosperity that is America's God-given right anymore.

Wishful thinking

[gidds]

Absolutely. I don't know why this keeps coming up...

Well all know that many techies want a decent OS like Mac OS X on their x86 hardware. But wishful thinking ain't gonna make it happen.

Apple is primarily a hardware company. What good would it do them to remove one of the main advantages to using their hardware? All the brand recognition in the world can't help you if no-one needs to buy your product.

No it was licensed clones that almost killed Appl.

[Anonymous Coward]

The people who licenced the MacOS ate Apple's lunch by turning out faster cheaper Macs and selling them to Apple's customers. They didn't grow the Mac market; they just competed with Apple for Apple's customer base.

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology ?????

[Bob Davis, Retired]

Apple's AAC is actually licensed from Dolby and improved upon - it's the only AAC encoder that DOESN'T sound like shit.

Apple's AAC at 96 blows away MP3s at 192. At least to my ears they do (listened to on Klipsch monitors and Yamaha NS10s).

Battery replacement costs

[tgibbs]

It still is. Have you read about iPod battery replacement costs?

Yes, I've heard that it can amount to an outrageous 15 cents per day!

Dilution? Nope: iPods for NASCAR dads

[Zhe Mappel]

Far from diluting Apple's brand, this move protects it while managing to find a whole new udder on the cash cow.

Despite the real gains it has made in OS improvements, Apple's cachet remains largely in its sexy, elite image. The schizophrenia that's marked its retail relationship with Target and other vendors - iPods for sale one day, then not, then back on again - points to the problems of dealing with the unexpected success of having a mass consumer hit on its hands.

And when is it ever a problem to dominate a mass consumer market? Well, it's a problem when you need to protect the refined sensibilities of your loyal base when at the same time you want to get a little, uh, action with consumers on the other side of the tracks. Put another way: how do you retain the people who don't shrink in horror at declarations that your product is "lickable" while reaching out to guys who dwell at Wal-Mart? They're mutually exclusive markets. You can't exactly make the ickyPod, now, can you? (Or can you? Look at the colors on those miniPods, jeezus!)

So this is Apple's challenge, then: continue selling iPods as avatars of youthful upmarket hipness, while growing the business by shifting product to another market segment via a ho-hum go-between. Enter HP with plenty of succesful experience in being ho-hum...

Re:Not so obvious: HP will undercut Apple's pricin

[mabhatter654]

You seem to think that HP actually MAKES THINGS nowdays...ha,ha...

Most HP consumer hardware is simply outsourced from southeast asia...sure HP designs it, but they don't actually build much of anything consumer-oriented anymore like a good American mega corp. It's scary how much of our high tech design is done in taiwan nowdays...where do you think the Abits, Asus, and Fic's of the world came from...they design much more than they let on for american companies!

Another reason this might make sense for Apple?

[King_TJ]

I don't know that it would play out this way, but potentially, this move might allow Apple to start offering all Apple branded iPods as being the natively Mac-formatted versions, while the blue HP versions come formatted for Windows by default.

(Apple currently offers only second-rate Windows support for the iPod as it stands, anyway. You can't boot a DOS/Windows type OS over firewire to a PC - although you CAN do this on a Mac system. iPods formatted in Apple's HFS+ format won't synchronize to iTunes on a Windows PC unless you run Apple's utility to reformat the iPod in FAT32, erasing anything already on it. That or you buy a 3rd. party PC product that can read Mac filesystems, like "MacOpener".)

Re:Another reason this might make sense for Apple?

[presearch]

Are those shortcomings Apple's fault?
Your key phrase: "second-rate Windows"

Re:Another reason this might make sense for Apple?

[NatasRevol]

You can't boot a DOS/Windows type OS over firewire to a PC

How exactly is this Apple's fault? Don't you think you should point the finger at the OS designer?? Next you're going to blame Apple because you have to go into the BIOS to switch to a CD boot instead of just holding down the 'c' key right?

Re:Another reason this might make sense for Apple?

[King_TJ]

My intent wasn't to "point the finger at Apple" for PC BIOS limitations. Rather, Apple could make more of an effort than they do to allow cross platform iPod compatibility. (EG. Build support into iTunes for Windows to read files from the HFS+ filesystem via firewire.)

Since they don't seem too excited at adding this sort of support, that tells me maybe they'd rather just let an OEM like HP handle the "Windows side" of the iPod?

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology ?????

[vicparedes]

The iPod OS is very slick and even though there are close to similar copies - none are as easy - no other player has the games that I'm aware of either

Actually, Apple licenses the iPod's OS from another company, PortalPlayer.

No, not better.

[soft_guy]

Darwin, yes. Any other part of the OS, no.

Can you say costly, pain in the ass, and serves no purpose?

I thought you could.

There's a ton of shit that had to be moved into the NeXT base from OS 9. No one would bother making all that code work on x86.

Re:No, not better.

[laird]

"Darwin, yes. Any other part of the OS, no."

When I said that Rhapsody ran on x86, I was _not_ referring to Darwin; I was referring to the complete "Rhapsody" operating system, which I used to run on off-the-shelf PC's. Rhapsody was the code name for MacOS X before it shipped to end users. The whole thing ran, all the way up to the Display Postscript rendered UI, except for "yellow box". So you could (and I did) compile any Cocoa app as a "far binary" and it ran fine on either PPC or x86. What's what I'm saying Apple is still making sure runs on the x86, in order to keep their options open.

Re:No, not better.

[Jayzz]

Rhapsody was little more than OPENSTEP with MacOS classic like user interface. There was even a way to turn on OPENSTEP style interface. It was probably Apple's way to entice OPENSTEP developers who apparetnly didn't have Apple hardware.

MacOS X is quite different from Rhapsody. I'm not saying they don't have ported it to x86. I heard they did, but I honestly don't know. But trying to use Rhapsody x86 version's existence as a proof of MacOS X x86 version is not that strong argument. It's like Microsoft has PPC version of Win XP somewhere, because they have Win NT for PPC while ago.

Re:No, not better.

[laird]

"MacOS X is quite different from Rhapsody. I'm not saying they don't have ported it to x86. I heard they did, but I honestly don't know. But trying to use Rhapsody x86 version's existence as a proof of MacOS X x86 version is not that strong argument. It's like Microsoft has PPC version of Win XP somewhere, because they have Win NT for PPC while ago."

My guess is that both companies keep internal builds that run across various CPU's in order to make sure that they keep their code clean and portable. Running on both the PPC and x86 goes a long way towards flushing out issues that would cause problems on 64-bit CPU's, for example. So I think that we're pretty much in agreement...

Re:Europeans are fags, that's why

[Anonymous Coward]

If France hadn't bailed the revolutionaries out during the war for independence we would not have been in a position to return the favor.

Funny how memory is so selective.

[Enter] [Play] ?

[SiliconEntity]

I can' t wait to see HP's RPN interface to the iPod...

Re:HP-Invent... my ass

[hirschma]

They did invent it. Look at this patent.

As one of the inventors mentioned on the Yahoo groups PJ-100 list, it seems that HP is actually going to pay Apple to use their own patented technology.

I really think that HP is just at the beginning of a long decline with this brilliant move.

Sure...

[Anonymous Coward]

But can HP make their "hPod" anwhere near as great of a value as any Creative NOMAD by selling it for a reasonable price?

Oh, to think how much people love inferior hardware just because it says "Apple" on it...

Re:Sure...

[Hitchcock_Blonde]

Inferior hardware? Yeah, right. What superior hardware do you use?

Re:Sure...

[Anonymous Coward]

I use a NOMAD Jukebox 2, actually. It's not the best portable music player (a Jukebox Zen would be in my opinion), but consider these things:

1. Coming from Creative, it has a number of audio features (called EAX), which are entertaining and handy. This includes custom EQ, environmental effects, Smart Volume Management, and so forth.
2. It only cost a little over $100 and has the above features and a 10 GB hard drive. While a 10 GB iPod model is unavailable (I think) for comparison, I read that the iPod Mini, with a mere 4 GB of space, would cost nearly 3 times that much. If you still want to compare prices, consider a 60 GB Jukebox Zen Xtra for $400 to a 40 GB iPod for nearly $500. Is Apple's hardware really worth that much?
3. It doesn't cost $100 to get your battery replaced when it dies, as the battery is not built in. Yes, the Li-Ion battery is still expensive, but would you rather buy a new battery for $40, or ship your iPod in to have the battery replaced by a professional for $100? As an additional advantage, since replacing the battery can be done any time without any tools, you can have as many of these batteries as you want, so you can double (or triple, or quadruple...) the listening time available, for a long trip perhaps.
4. iPod's battery life is not as long as a NOMAD Jukebox. Back that up with the ability to have multiple batteries, and we have a winner for extended listening!

I think it's obvious who has the better hardware. But if you wanna use iPod just so you can think you're cool, I guess that's fine. Don't forget to be cool by spending $200 for a copy of Windows XP Pro. ;)

Re:Sure...

[mhbtr]

However...
the UI of the Nomad sucks and is inelegant. It is fairly difficult to navigate the Nomad family to pick your tunes, and the Jukebox 2 is a large product. Lastly, the nomad family is not well integrated with any music store, although it does work reasonably well with Musicmatch. I do wish Apple had an easily replaceable battery, because one time when I was skiing it ran out of juice. In usual use however this has yet to be an issue for me.

I really do love the way my iPod works, and I agree with you that the $249 is ridiculous, but I think Apple is squarely going after the other small 4 GB models from RIO and Creative, not the large Nomad 2 (REALLY large) or the medium size Zen and iRiver (priced competitively to the larger iPod). Those just announced 4 GB products from both Rio and Creative are, surprise surprise, $249.
Eytan
--
Q: How do you convert ordinary water into Holy Water?

A: You boil the hell out of it.

Re:Sure...

[Anonymous Coward]

the UI of the Nomad sucks and is inelegant

I caught on to the Jukebox 2's UI very quickly. I can do most everything in a flash. Reordering the contents playlists is a bit tedious, though. I can't compare it to an iPod's, since I've never had the chance to use an iPod.

And yeah, the Jukebox 2 is a large product. It works for my uses, which includes sitting in the car or at my desk most of the time. It wouldn't be good for using while walking, of course. I'd love to have a cuter NOMAD, like a Jukebox Zen, but they're not in my price range. And since I don't really need an ultra-compact player, or a larger disk (at the moment anyway), that makes the Jukebox 2 a great player for me.

Re:Dear Apple: why? - a Faustian Bargain?

[Paladin144]

As I was reading your post I was listening to Faust (Overture) by Wagner. You may be right, it could be a deal with the devil, or at least a major demon - we're not talking Microsoft here!

It could be a wise play for Apple. If they didn't get there first Microsoft would've been all over it with their infernal Media Center. Still, letting them slap the HP logo on iPods? ...Isn't that desecration?

Ideally, I see this as a risky play by Apple, like reaching into a hornet's nest for a gem, that could pay off with big time dividends. They could end up stealing a lot of customers with this wager. Microsoft will move aggressively to counter them, so they'll have to act fast. Microsquash has been paying more attention to it's other foe lately; open source. I wonder if Bill Gates underestimated Jobs. I just hope Steve knows what he's doing. I don't want to live in some sort of subscription-based Microsoft-branded universe, beholden to Gates and his pals.

A bold prediction.

[shigelojoe]

Apple Computer may end up either buying or merging with Apple Records. Apple is not so pleased that Apple violated their agreemant and is plunging headfirst into the music biz.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Apple will win.

Step in the right direction?

[rixstep]

Now if they could only do this with NeXTSTEP - er, OPENSTEP - er, Cocoa - then we might have something. Sans the Carbon puckey of course.

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology ?????

[juhaz]

Why do you think we don't see lots and lots of 20 30 and 40 GB hard drive players?

We don't?

Open your eyes, those things are popping up everywhere at a tremendous rate.

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology ?????

[Anonymous Coward]

I know of 2 companies that produce 20 GB, none that produce 30 or 40 other than Apple

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology ?????

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they don't, Pixo - designed the OS specifically for the iPod - Apple contracted it out and does not pay per iPod for the OS (as licensing would indicate) That said, I do think they pay per calendar year or per run of units. For instance the 40GB has a slightly different OS than the others (only works with OSX) the iPod mini also has a different variation. Apple owns the rights and helped co design the UI for the iPod and will be licensing it out to HP

Logical Next Step...

[Johnny Mozzarella]

Apple has the #1 Video Editing App
Apple has the #1 DVD Creation App
Apple has one of the best high-end Compositing Apps
Apple has one of the best high-end Digital Audio Apps

The only other high profile content creation area they do not have a foothold in is 3D animation.
To me the logical next step would be to buy Maya.

Only problems with this are
1) There are already several good 3D apps for the OS.
2) SGI will only sell for a ridiculous amount

Most high end 3D animation is done on PCs & UNIX workstations. That won't change until Maya's high-end stuff is available for the Mac OS. Currently only their low end stuff is available for the Mac.

If Apple buys Maya, ports the good stuff and sells it cheaper for the Mac OS then we will see thousands of animators switch.

Re:Logical Next Step...

[burns210]

that was exactly my line of thinking entirely. Maybe Apple can do a a corporate partnership with SGI, kind of a 'you rub my back, i'll rub yours' to enter a deal where SGI ports Maya(and whatever other highend apps they have) to the mac... I just don't know what apple has to give SGI.

I don't SGI would be willing to sell it's own software devision, but that would be highly cool as well. Well worth the money, for apple IMO.

Re:Logical Next Step...

[TVC15]

> to enter a deal where SGI ports Maya(and whatever other highend apps they have) to the mac...

Maya is already ported to OS X. Has been for a long time. Or am I mixing something up?

Re:Logical Next Step...

[burns210]

nope, i just got confused. Ignore my earlier post as clearly Maya is available on mac os X, and i didn't realize that it was... It would still be cool if Apple were to buy Alias|Wavefront, though. ;)

Re:Logical Next Step...

[Johnny Mozzarella]

There is a low-end version of Maya called "Maya Complete"
There is also a high-end version called "Maya Unlimited"

Only the low-end version has been ported to Mac OS X.
In order to attract the animation industry to Mac OS X they really need Maya Unlimited. This is why I suggested Apple buy Alias Wavefront.

Re:Logical Next Step...

[Johnny Mozzarella]

Although the low-end version of Maya called "Maya Complete" is available on Mac OS X
There is also a high-end version called "Maya Unlimited"

Only the low-end version has been ported to Mac OS X.
In order to attract the animation industry to Mac OS X they really need Maya Unlimited. This is why I suggested Apple buy Alias Wavefront.

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology ?????

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice rant, but you haven't made the case that Apple had anything to do with the design of these hard drives.

Why would "competition" drop the price?

[finelinebob]

As others have pointed out, this goes beyond licensing -- Apple is going to manufacture the HP iPods as well. That means they can control HP's cost per unit. The only way for HP to "compete" and try to cut the price point out from under Apple is to cut their own throats.

Besides that, the iPod controls better than 30% of the mp3 player market (and 70% of the revenues) at its current price point. Does anyone out there think HP/Compaq wants to loose money to gain part of the mp3 player pie, or do you think they want to hitch their wagon to a device that not only leads the field, but sells with something like a 30% profit margin as well?

If those analyst-estimates of the profit margin on the iPod are accurate, you have to wonder just how much of that margin Apple is giving up to HP. For the $300 15GB iPod, that means Apple's cost is about $210. How generous would the deal have to be for HP to bite? Even if Apple split the profit margin down the middle (which seems mighty generous to me), that puts HP's cost per unit at $255. In addition, HP will have some costs (shipping, storage of inventory, marketing, etc.) that will likely be greater than Apple has (especially at the start of this deal), so add a little more to their cost (say $260). So, if Apple gave HP a sweetheart of a deal and HP wanted to make absolutely no money from the deal, then HP might be able to offer its iPod for a price low enough to grab customers.

But why would they want to do that, when the iPod sells like hotcakes at its current price point?

Seems to me that if HP is going to compete with anyone, it's with Dell ... and Apple is already doing that rather successfully. If HP follows Apple's lead on this, I'd wager they'll grab more customers from Dell than they would from Apple, and I doubt they'd have to drop the price of the HP iPod to do so.

THINK TROJAN HORSE

[tyrione]

Hewlett Packard knows it needs to remain viable and while not being a guinea pig to Microsoft--they have competing product lines in the Enterprise so don't expect a cozy friendship in the Conumer realms as well.

Apple gives HP its Digital Media update to remain competitive and offer a solution that Microsoft doesn't even have right now but DELL already has.

They could have gone with the Real Products but wanted to be with Apple and the No. 1 MP3 Player in the markets.

Apple receives higher revenues for both iPods and music purchases from the iTMS which in turn strengthens their positios with the Music Industry.

Finally, Apple gets people used to their products and that will trickle down to people wanting to learn and discover what Apple has to offer.

Besides, the iPod works for both Operating Systems so all the HP Customers are out if they are that willing to switch is HP Hardware minus their music catalogues.

Just give them a taste and see what happens.

iPod Mini

[ProfessionalCookie]

I just got back from MWSF and I have to say if you haven't seen an iPod Mini, you need to find one and play with it. The pictures don't even do it justice (sometimes I forget how small the regular iPod is). the interface with the buttons behind the touch wheel is awesome and makes for fast, simple navigation. If you only need 4 gigs (I know, no one is raising their hand) then you need a iPod Mini.

This is more about increasing momentum...

[ohasten]

and defining standards. Since the intro of iTunes, I have been saying that Apple should offer it free, to be included on new computers.

Smart move for Apple and I think it was also a smart move for HP.

Apple gains increased music as well as iPod sales. The sheer numbers of people with AAC files will force others to adopt and or include Fairplay/AAC capabilities in their machines.

Apple gets a WinTel manufacturer to actively promote the setup and more importantly to build upon what Apple has. By build upon I mean work to implement things like Rendezvous in other products.

As I see it the only thing that Apple could have done better was to have this announcement when they announced iTunes.

O

They were not the first movers.

[keegleme]

They are the first movers, but our good friends at Microsoft have proven time and again how little that really means

They were not the first movers this time. Way before the first generation ipods were introduced, there are already a plethora of mp3 players present in the market. they were not the first in the digital music business neither. pressplay and others jumped to the bandwagon way ahead in time. What makes them "ahead" now is not a case of the early bird catching most of the worms. it's all about a solution that works. and works great it does. Steve Jobs is right. Maybe this time the better product will win.

Apples computers are different enough to avoid much of the direct competition but I would propose that the iPod and iTMS do not share this advantage.

but apple's market share eroded still. sad to say, the success or failure of a product in the mind+market(share) is not just about how different or better a product is over its competition, as what history has told us. That's barely half the story. Marketing and good Strategy is what cements the lead in the end. And i do agree with all of the three strategies that you mentioned. again, at the end of the day, its still nice to see the better product having the greater share.

Re:Not so obvious: HP will undercut Apple's pricin

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup, everyone outsources things to asia. Apple has a number of production lines there, and you'd be silly to think that someone within that company didn't make "suggestions" to make production run smoothly.

Crap, I'm starting to wonder if Dell's OptiPlex line has also been outsourced, because it's failure rates are approaching Dimension failure rates, which has been outsourced for ages (most of those models are 100% engineered by Intel and produced in SE asia).

Video of Fiorina announcement today at CES ...

[finelinebob]

... is available at CNET At one point, she holds up a prototype of the "HP Digital Music Player".

[Interesting how she starts off on how HP decided to look to Apple instead of build their own, then later says something like "why did Apple come to us?" as a prelude to what HP offers to the partnership. Who came to whom?]

Re:licensing Apple's design, not technology ?????

[Archangel Michael]

Here is the quote from the FireWire TradeGroup concerning Licensing the Logo and Trademarked Name.

"Subject to Licensee's compliance with the term of this Agreement, Licensor Grants Licensee a limited, not-exclusive, no-transferable, royalty-free, worldwideright and license to use, and let others use, the FireWire Marks, incliding the FireWire logo,....."

Download the PDF from here, and see for yourself:

http://www.1394ta.org/license/FireWire_License-G ui des_v6.pdf

Video of the "hPod"

[Dak RIT]

CNet just posted a video with Carly showing off the new HP-branded iPod here.

The "hPod" will have a HP logo on it, although the Apple logo still appears at startup.

Re:Europeans are fags, that's why

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, I dont know what nationality you fit into but you do exist in a category known as racist. So you and Adolf Hitler would probably get along famously. And Im going to presume by your incredible arrogance that you are also a total and utter... Actually, being European I wont rise to that sort of idiotic statement. Its obviously designed to provoke a reaction to make your tiny little life seem a little more...signifiCUNT.

But which iPod?

[xirtam_work]

Probably a bit late in the day to join the discussion, already well over 500 posts! But, I just can't picture a 'HP blue' version of the white iPod. However, I can easily picture a 'HP Blue' version of the new iPod mini. It wouldn't stand out as being a less cool product seeing as there are other colour available for the model. I mean can you imagine kids getting flack from their mates for having a iHop (?? just made that name up on the spot) thing instead of a iPod if it really stands out as being so very different than the original white model? I can, so kids will either pressure their parents into getting the original iPod if the HP model is a blue version of the original iPod.

Lastly, I see the iPod being sold as a point of sale configuration add-on when people buy a HP PC, or sold bundled with the PC to make it more attractive to buyers, instead of throwing in cheaper printers and scanners like they do all the time.

PICTURES OF THE NEW HP iPod HERE!

[xirtam_work]

I take it all back :-)

I've just seen a picture of the Blue iPod here: Blue HP iPod Pics

I still think that the iPod mini was the model that they should have opted for, nevermind. Maybe they will later on.

Re:PICTURES OF THE NEW HP iPod HERE!

[xirtam_work]

typo alert - silly mac keyboard has quotes in a different place, use this link PICS OF HP BLUE iPod HERE

Re:HP-Invent... my ass

[bennomatic]

I know this is a common thing to say here at /., but I can't believe that patent was granted. Media players have been doing ram buffering for years. Maybe in the name of skip protection &c, but I can't imagine that nobody recognized the power advantages of ram buffering before 1999.

Re:Carly and post-feudalism

[qtp]

Just like we did in the dark ages.

Welcome to the neo-Hobbesian nightmare.

Re:Behold... the thread of HP iPod naming suggesti

[PetWolverine]

hpPod (pronounced hep-pod) - Comes with several pills of amphetamines
psyPod - Comes with dropper of LSD, 50 doses
skyPod - Comes with a personal flying machine capable of vertical takeof/landing in a typical back yard with a range up to 300 miles with two people in the cab
thaiPod - Comes with a side of wanton soup

ugly blue?

[mikeloader]

The photos I've seen of the HP-branded iPod are small, but as far as I can tell, the colour is rather ugly. I think the iPod would look great in certain colours, but the HP blue prototype shown in the video looks so gray that it's just flat.

Re:HP-Invent... my ass

[Anonymous Coward]

HP Invent...

What do they sell again?

Oh, that's right, IBM Compatible computers running a Microsoft Operating Systems, and their major profit centre is selling rpinters that are either (Xerox invented) Laser Engines or (Canon invented) Inkjets...

Should it perhaps be;
HP, Invent?

Hewlett-Packard: No WMA for IPod

[thevil]

Wired News has a comment from a HP-spokesperson saying that Paul Thurrot is Wrong.
Hewlett-Packard: No WMA for IPod