Slashdot Mirror
Ask RealNetworks CEO Rob Glaser
RealNetworks has always been more Linux-friendly than other streaming media purveyors, and is now moving closer to the open source camp with its Helix Community effort. More recently, Real has made a big media splash by selling downloadable tunes in an iPod-compatible format. Does any of this matter, considering that world + dog seems to be jumping on the downloadable multimedia bandwagon? Can Real once again become "the" streaming media leader? Will Real's 49 cent "limited time only" song download price force other music download vendors to cut their prices? We have no idea, but hopefully Rob Glaser does. He's promised to answer your questions personally (rather than have PR people speak for him). So ask whatever you like. We'll forward 10 of the highest-moderated questions to him by email and post his answers soon after he gets them back to us.
Rob, why doesn't Real drop all the pretense of desiring to have an interoperable solution with the Ipod and actually use one for their downloads site? The Ipod supports a few standard file formats and one DRM encumbered one. If Real were really about customer choice, they'd sell non DRM encumbered files and then be able to shout from a mountain that their music works with the Ipod as well as almost every other digital media player.
I have a website. It's about Macs.
Given the ongoing struggle for control of content distribution via proprietary formats, do you see any hope for more vendor neutral formats that don't tie customers to one particular 'technology'? It seems that constantly changing formats often have more to do with vendor lockin than genuine technological differentiation. What is Real doing to improve this situation and are other vendors likely to cooperate?
Boy, this question is really flirting with the line. Real has become one of those companies that geeks put in the catagory of "wouldn't piss on if they were on fire". How are they trying to fix those mistakes? Cutting the price isn't enough when people feel tainted for even using your product.
Never confuse volume with power.
Why does Real player force you to install 100 things you don't need and place icons everywhere, add bloated background tasks / services, insert an item into the task tray, popup daily "real news", take over major formats, etc, when many people only use it to view videos that aren't in any other format? Why don't any of the major software companies offer a lean clean, cruft free version of their software? If REAL offered that, I'd pay for the minimal version before the expanded one!
yeah, i think we should go back to the $17.99 standard for cds at the music store, for the 12 track album.... that's much cheaper!
exspecially for those albums that only have one or two good songs that you listen to over and over.
Runnin' On Empty
Al Qaeda has ninjas!
Do you hope that at one point in time Real's position on open-source will encourage hardware manufacturers of portable music devices to port their drivers to linux (i.e. Dell's Jukebox) and use a Real program as a music library program? In other words does Real hope to push the linux perspective into the media market? As a linux user I feel a little left out of the hype because even though it's growing it doesn't seem like enough corporations bother to notice it.
---- I am certain of only one thing : I know nothing else.
Since RealNetworks objects to Apple constraining use of their proprietary formats, when does RealNetworks plan to set an example by opening up all of their file formats for free use and modification by other competing companies?
Asking the not-too-obvious but deeply related issue of a company that doesn't give a f*ck about people might get a more honest answer because he doesn't have PR handlers coaching him on this point.
Yes they sucked. Yes, they are getting better. They _should_ be lauded for not being scumbags.
In this time of ethics (and their lack) at the corporate level, how do you feel Real measures up in having EARNED (not just claimed) customer trust.
Do you compare yourselves to folks like Google who even my mother trusts totally?
I ask this in light of your consistent corporate behavior, which has included:
- You used to spam me to no end. And this spamming was EPIC, I still can not believe how much junk you, and how impossible it was to stop getting it.
- Your player started taking over my system, including "important" pop up messages in my "message center" that were nothing but commercial pitches. Do you have any idea what is important in people's lives? Not buying more goldpass/superpass combo's!
- This behavior was clearly calculated, and the options to disable this bloated junk was extremely hard to access or enable (it poped up a warning dialog).
- The fact that corporate help desk folks shudder when end users express install the end user version of the real player virus on their PC's.
- The fact that when I visit older folks I inevitably find that their system has been taken over by Real, and that in addition to the desktop, system tray, message center junk, the associations they have selected (IMAGES in Realplayer? please) make no sense.
Have you focused on serving your customers, or screwing the folks who installed your software for as much cash as you could get from them while hiding behind claims of "features" and "benefits".
Before you claim trust, you have to change the people behind the claim.
Oh come on, you can do better than that. I'm not saying these answers represent my view, just showing how they could be answered by Glaser.
Why is Real so intrusive into the average windows system when using the express installation method? [...]
The Realplayer installation is not intrusive. It is customary practice for many software packages aimed at a general public to install visible and easily discoverable ways to launch them. Experienced users can customize their installations to a large degree. Maybe you do not realize that many people accidentally delete shortcut and do not know how to recreate them.
Why is the free version the hardest version to find on your website?
I suspect you have not visited our website recently. In the past we received some complaint that the free player was difficult to find. We have listened to our customers and restructured the website. The free player is very easy to find.
Why must I choose a custom install and play a game of "catch-em-all" to avoid some of these issues?
We aim our software at a very large public, and many people would never discover a lot of what we have to offer if they were not turned on by default. Offering many choices for experienced users is exactly the purpose of a custom install.
Why does Real assume I'm interested in news, updates, libraries, or any of the nonsense that it is configured for by your company?
As you may be aware, complex software is never bug free and secure from the start. It is our duty to inform and encourage our customers to upgrade to newer versions where bugs are fixed and security holes are closed when discovered. The experienced user who can take responsibilty for their own installed software can always choose to turn off automatic updates.
In short, why does Real feel the need to be so Obnoxious? These are "real" questions posed by "real" users, like here and supported by your own employees!
These views represent a small minority of our customer base. For most people who complain about our software it is actually quite simple to turn off features that you describe as "obnoxious" in the Preferences.
Do we really want questions (and answers) like these? Please take some time to think of good questions that are acutally hard to answer. Don't waste questions and mod-points just to share your opinion about Real's software. You may have your replies ready for such answers, but Glaser does not need to answer those.
Exactly. Why the dichotomy? And why the back tracking? Why say you think the iPod isn't going to be a success, then all of a sudden want part of it's action?
It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
I moderate therefore I rule!
--
Interesting addition to the question, but unfortunately it is based on a presumption that is not technically correct. Both Apple and Real use the same compression format (MPEG AAC) in their music stores. This is not a proprietary format. It is a standard. It can be decoded with a cheap ASIC, which is why it is a popular choice for portable digital music devices.
I believe what RealNetworks objects to is that Apple is not licensing their "fairplay" DRM technology to allow other legal music download stores (such as Real's) to offer their product to iPod owners.
The important question here is: "Why can't all of the technology companies unify under one common, open DRM solution so every device works with every music store and vice versa?" However, this question is probably better posed to Steve Jobs and Bill Gates than to Rob Glaser. When are those guys going to do a slashdot interview?
The reason that nobody can unite behind a single DRM technology is that certain technology companies would either like to own the music download and device business completely (Apple), or they would like their DRM solution to become the defacto standard so they can become a toll collector on all digital music transactions (Microsoft). Personally, I don't like either of those possibilities, and I'm glad to see a company putting a wrench in those plans, even if it's RealNetworks.
Regardless of the views of the grandparent, I think most people are incensed over Real's hypocrisy, rather than supporting Apple's use of proprietary formats.
I'm aware of that, but what is a format, really? By adding the DRM, you've changed the way the file works- or at least the routine by which it's accessed. I think your objection is a bit of a red herring, though technically correct.
The important question here is: "Why can't all of the technology companies unify under one common, open DRM solution so every device works with every music store and vice versa?"......I'm glad to see a company putting a wrench in those plans, even if it's RealNetworks
Oh, I pray to god they don't. I'd rather the various companies remain deadlocked. If they come to a common DRM, it's very unlikely to be open, and in any event, it's likely to make DRM an accepted societal norm. Far better that these companies continue to fight it out publicly, crippling consumer goods as they go, drawing attention to the problems inherent in the idea of DRM.
I wonder how true that is, given that Apple has already partnered with HP, and Sony. I suspect there might be more to the story than what we've been told..
I am the maverick of Slashdot
Here's my question:
You claim that Real is all about choice and opennness. However, your license agreements for your SDK outright prohibit using your software to create programs that will decode Real files and transcode them into other formats. Even unprotected Real audio files may not be converted to AIFF or MP3, according to your license. You have threatened legal action against people for doing so, also.
I know that I, for one, will never purchase files which I am prohibited from transcoding into other formats.
If you're really about openness and freedom of choice, why don't you let me choose what format I keep my audio files in?
Currently I have to play back Real audio of radio shows in real time, record the output to AIFF, then re-encode to MP3, so that I can play on my MP3 player. It'd be so much better if I could just go straight from Real audio to MP3.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
My questions would be:
1. Why did I get for my expensive subscription to the Euro 2004 only crappy video streams?
2. Why should I care about Real since they have ignored my feature requests and pleas for a better software for years?
3. Why should I install another media player that wants me to sell only expensive mini clips and radio stations that are mostly for free anyway?
4. And even when I subscribe to the radio pass, I still get stuttering streams and bad quality - can't you deliver what you promise and charge me for?
5. Why has Real missed the train to develop and support truely open initiatives like DIVX (in the beginning), XVID or the new BBC format?
6. Since Real complains about Apple's ignorance I like to complain about Reals lacking support and ignorance for MD-Players and so many other third party devices. Why am I ignored just because I have a not so cool tool?
7. Why is Real Server software so extremely expensive compared to Apples streaming solution?
8. Why does every media player have such a fancy interfaces that follow no standards except their own? Can't you comply to the standards of the OS the player is running on?
9. When will Real admit the failure and stop doing the RealArcade? There are hardly any unique products in there and I can buy most of them without the surrounding Real hype.
10. How much money has Real left in the bank to survive against Apple and Microsoft?
That's it.
It is amazing, particularly because Apple appears to have earned it.
These 'drooling freaks' are people like my cousin, who didn't know there was any DRM, and has been using iTMS since day one. Or like my roommate - who has four Macs - also hadn't noticed, and doesn't care, and gets mad at me for even explaining it.
Don't you get it? There's no barrier here for any of these people using iTunes if - this is the tricky bit - they have not bumped their heads up against it. As far as these people concerned (and I think I can safely say its the majority of iPod/iTunes users at this point) the whole Apple music suite has done nothing but empower them to use their music in all sorts of ways they could never have before, while not restricting any of the things they used to do.
I know this is a difficult concept for a drooling open-source-loving anti-proprietary freak like yourself, but give the notion a try, will you? I'm as much for open standards as anyone but frankly at some point you have to recognize that there has to be at least a little give-and-take vis-a-vis the record industry, no matter how fucking retarded you know they are.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
A couple of points:
1. Why do you really have so little faith in your product? If you offered a superior player and service Mac users would switch. Your player already supports songs from iTunes Music Store so that would ease the transition.
2. Is it really impossible to make drm capable quicktime components? Because with Real component your songs would play in iTunes.