Slashdot Mirror
Ballmer Says iPod Users are Thieves
A 'music thief' (apparently) writes "According to Steve Ballmer, CEO of Microsoft: "The most common format of music on an iPod is 'stolen'."
He appears convinced Microsoft will lead the way in Digital Rights Management and also believes Microsoft will steal a march on Apple in making the digital home a reality because Apple "doesn't have the volumes".
"There is no way that you can get there with Apple. The critical mass has to come from the PC, or a next-generation video device," he said."
They stolds it frums us.
Billing Microsoft as the good guys and Apple the villains of the piece - at least as far as corporate America, rather than users, is concerned, Ballmer said: "We've had DRM in Windows for years. The most common format of music on an iPod is 'stolen'."
I don't understand the "corporate America" distinction. Is he talking about people downloading stuff to their iPod from the computers at work and stealing it that way? Because just about every Windows user I know has a computer at least 50% full of stolen shit (usually including the OS itself). MSFT is somehow not supporting theft because they don't have an iPod clone and their OS has DRM? I would go so far as to claim that PocketPCs support piracy but MSFT didn't create the hardware they just created the software. I guess you have to do both to support the thieves.
Sorry, that doesn't make me think any less of the iPod and it certainly doesn't make me think any more highly of Windows.
meet kettle.
That's exactly how you win customers -- by alienating them.
Per Square Mile, a blog about density
... you can use iPods with the PC. What's this about "critical mass"?
The following sentence is true. The preceding sentence was false.
M$ systems sell very well. M$ peripherals, not so much. No amount of FUD, or lawyer-posturing, will get an M$ audio system into people's pockets over the iPod. It's too late.
"The dew has clearly fallen with a particularly sickening thud this morning"
I really don't know why Balmer is so mad at Ipod?
He really seems to love his...
...is 74.8 stolen copies of Windows XP Professional.
Beep beep.
I think he means: 'the critical mass has to come from windows'. Why? No technical reason, it's just because people at MS will have a temper tamtrum if this doesn't go their way.
``Microsoft will steal a march on Apple in making the digital home a reality because Apple "doesn't have the volumes". The critical mass has to come from the PC, or a next-generation video device''
Seems to me that Apple is a lot more successful in pushing large volumes of next generation devices than MS.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
I took that comment as Steve Ballmer saying more digital music is pirated then not. Does everyone on this board actually disagree with that?
The "as far as corporate America..." means that if the world was using a Microsoft based device, then they could force everything to be played in a format in which they could use their DRM system to insure that everything played was paid for and legal.
Which means that corporate America (ex. the music industry) should start helping MS gain more market share in that market.
You'll have that sometimes...
Or did MP3s only become popular *BECAUSE* the music was stolen in the first place anyway?? And so the trend
Mp3s -> Mp3 Players -> ???? -> Profit ?
I may not be speaking for the masses, but the key thing about having my music in my player of choice (Archos AV340) is the fact that I can take the music from *any* source, and because I choose to download the mp3s rather than re-recording from original Vinyl, ripping from CD, remastering from cassette, 8track etc Is purely a matter of my taste and value of my time.
Prevent people from using music easily that they ALREADY LEGAL OWN in one format or another, and see that format/player go the way of the BETAMAX.
I find I buy more music now that own an iPod. And I am not implying that I ever "borrowed" any previously. I have about 700+ tracks on my iPod and when the feeling moves me I go to iTunes and buy another album. The ITMS library is growing, too, and now includes a sizeable collection of the works of Brian Eno (great for coding, writing specs, so on.) I don't know where Monkey Boy Ballmer gets his info, and wouldn't want to go there. Unless all the interns at Microsoft trade music freely ...
My user name was a mistake. Input wasn't restricted, my bad.
From the article:
"We've had DRM in Windows for years. The most common format of music on an iPod is 'stolen'."
Because everybody knows windows is all about security. If you put a pirated mp3 on a windows box, the drm system won't allow you to access it. All the windows boxes running eMule and Kaaza are merely figments of your imagination. They're iPods. Honest.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Since I got my iPod and used a decent music service iTunes, there have been no 'shared' music on my player. Balmer thinks that Apple cant get the job done - can he say iPod for Windows? As long as Apple continues to make accessories for other OS'es, they will have no problem competing.
My
Yes, the "stolen" music format...aka MP3 ... when those Franhofenzeigen guys invented MP3 compression, I don't even know why they went with the .MP3 extension. It would have been a lot clearer if they had just gone with the .stolen extension.
type: audio-x/stolen
SPAM
Yet another attempt to disseminate the false notion that MP3 files amount to stolen music. If I purchase a CD and rip it to MP3s for my own use, the resulting files are certainly not stolen--plain and simple. And if I get them from a legal online source, again, they are not stolen.
Just because someone COULD steal something doesn't mean they will, and doesn't automatically make the something stolen.
My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
1) Roughly what percent of your music collection is unauthorized files from P2P like Kazaa, FTP, etc.?
2) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from sources like iTunes Music Store, eMusic, etc?
3) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from shareable sources like Creative Commons-licensed music?
4) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from rips of your own CDs?
5) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from rips of friends' CDs?
(and what am I missing?)
Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
...on an iPod is 'stolen'.
Balmer, "iPod" can easily be replaced with "Windows" in your preceding statement. MP3 has been the de facto standard for music files for 7-8 years now, maybe longer. Were iPods around 7-8 years ago? No. What were they played on? Windows, under Winamp. The masses have understood how to rip their own (un-DRM'd) CDs since the turn of the millenium. Napster, Limewire, Kazaa, eDonkey and many more of flourished (til legal proceedings crush each) with trading of these files. I don't recall using my iPod to access any of these services. Oh yes, that's right. I used my Windows-running PC.
I know it's FUD, but this is just plain lousy FUD. Anyone with half a brain can see right through his attempt to link Windows with anti-piracy.
RW
from Ballmer:
"My 12-year-old at home doesn't want to hear that he can't put all the music that he wants in all of the places that he would like it," he joked.
Translation:
"When I tried to use my kid's iPod on a recent family trip, my son told me to shove my Barry Manilow CD up my ass."
According to Steve Ballmer, CEO of Microsoft: "The most common format of music on an iPod is 'stolen'.
/end rant
Uhh, yeah... And the most common format of music on a Windows PC iiiiiissss...........? Uhh huh, yeah.
So, if ANY company is accountable for music theft -- OBVIOUSLY it's Microsoft - they have the 'volumes,' right?
Bah!
Most microsoft users are thieves too ... if they actually bought the OS chances are they're running at least one piece of software which was copied illegally.
... wtf? Stolen? Copyright infringement is not the same as stealing something, whatever the demagogues like Balmer want you to believe.
And then again
---
"The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
under the induce act, wouldn't this hold balmer liable for inducing his customers to steal music?
it has to do with the fact that the RIAA wants DRM, and the user doesn't. so Ballmer's looking after the corporate interests ahead of the user interests.
What's funny is that he doesn't realise that new entertainment formats are mostly demand driven. People don't like div-x (the old one, where you had to "connect" to get movies), people don't use it. Same with DVD-A and SACD. Invariably, formats with draconian restrictions on them don't work. And although he wants to label people thieves, there's a very good reason why the iPod is popular, and MS's DRM isn't. The irony is Ballmer himself points it out in the article - "My 12-year-old at home doesn't want to hear that he can't put all the music that he wants in all of the places that he would like it". This isn't about stealing, it's about fair use. 12 year olds just want to do whatever they want to do with their music - like the rest of us. If stolen, free music is the only way we can get there, then so be it. Why pay for restrictions, when freedom is quite literally free?
It makes me laugh, the 12-y-o son of the man running the most powerful IT company in the world gets it, but Ballmer himself doesn't.
Which oddly enough is a theme repeated in the second article - his vision for the digital home - which involves "converged devices that integrate video, audio and computer technology". He's pretty much ripped off Steve Jobs' digital hub strategy from two years ago... and then he goes on to say: "There is no way that you can get there with Apple."
Sorry Steve, the only organisation you can be guaranteed to not get there with is Microsoft. It makes poor copies of good products, labels consumers who want freedom "thieves", and calls out organisations who innovate as not being good enough.
-- james
If someone has a budget for buying CDs/music each year, say $300, then even if they download extra music illegally, no-one is losing out as long as the consumer is still spending what they have budgeted to spend.
Music is a commodity these days. It isn't special like it was in the 50's. People expect music at all hours, but it isn't priced right to meet the current usage of music, so people download the extra music they need to fill in the gap.
I don't see how Microsoft can claim any kind of moral superiority over Apple. Apple at least had the decency to offer reasonably priced legal music quite some time ago. Per-song pricing allows you to take a small risk to discover new music, or just get the 2 good songs on a modern pop album that are any good. MSN Music is a lot more recent.
I can only assume that Microsoft will be designing Media Software that will not play non-MS-approved content. Otherwise how can it tell whether a song you are playing is something you ripped yourself, or downloaded? Surely you could burn a CD and re-rip if Microsoft enforced that type of requirement?
These big companies are only pissed off because online music sharing allows people to discover new music that isn't on the big labels, and then spend money on that music instead of HypedTrash. Most studies show that music purchasing hasn't dropped since file sharing started, at the worst it fluctuated in line with the economy, at best it has actually soared over what it should have been.
So in an open market, where I can choose among a number of devices that all do the same task, why would I choose the device that treats me as a criminal.
If I am a criminal, why would I buy the device that makes my job/avocation more difficult.
In either case, why would I buy the device who's biggest cheerleader treats me with such disdain.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
... according to Ballmer.
"My 12-year-old at home doesn't want to hear that he can't put all the music that he wants in all of the places that he would like it,"
I don't want to hear that either.
Wansu, th' chinese sailor
...is stolen.
So what if "[you've] had DRM in Windows for years" Microsoft? Windows did anything but halt the 13.6 million Napster users "stealing" music, et cetera.
"Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
Only a monopoly has the clout to force something that the consumer does not want (DRM) down their throats. Apple's can only try to entice the consumer with high quality products, variety, good service. They don't have a chance.
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
Just like they can insure that all installations of their software are perfectly legagl. I'll believe it when I see it.
Follow me
I think Jobs would be more likely to say Microsoft executives are dorks.
And unlike Ballmer in everything he's said in those two articles, Jobs would be damned right.
-- james
I think the higher-ups at Microsoft have completely lost the sense of how to do business in a healthy market.
That's why everything Microsoft does fails or produces massive losses when not being pushed by the PC domination.
Just look at Hailstorm. Or XBox. Or Windows/Alpha.
So Steve, STFU and GTFO. The reflected light from your forehead is blinding us.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
The thought that Microsoft can compete with "better" DRM is laughable. Show me a user that will switch to another DRM system, because, you know - it's better at limitting your freedom better, so you should switch to it, you filthy thief, right?
My thoughts for Ballmer: good luck in alienating your potential customers!
I don't know if Ballmer has been paying attention.
My roommate is a die-hard Microsoft fan. I don't just mean he uses Windows over Linux, either. I mean he will get compromised because of a failed update, have to reformat and reinstall, and he *still* favors MS. Why? Because of usability. Linux does not cater towards him and it certainly doesn't offer the gameplay. Mozilla/Firefox, despite what I try to tell him about security, is laughable. After all, why should he use a browser that takes 4 seconds to load a 2 second page?
Now, despite all of that, he uses iTunes. Why? Because where other "free software" fails, Apple does not. They provide a method for him to get what he needs when he needs it. And not only that, but he pays money hand over fist for services/music through iTunes.
So my question to Ballmer would have to be: If you've lost even your fanbois to Apple, who also has DRM, how exactly do you intend to actually gain a foothold in this market?
On a perfectly safe side note, the percentage of my "stolen" music collection used to be 100% MP3, now it's 80% MP3. Any MS representative want to take a guess as to what the other format is for my stolen music?
Ballmer's appointment marked a switch from customer focus and innovation (all the GNU type people should go off and hate me quietly in a corner at this point) to concept focus and buzzwords. It's amazing to think that there was a time (early-mid 90's) when if I wanted a vendor who'd actually listen and do stuff, I wanted MS. Now, they literally can't make a single statement without chanting a mantra -- 'developers! xml! digital nervous system! drm!' and getting actual action from them is like blood from a stone. Actual development units remain largely unchanged -- but they simply aren't running the show now.
It's a tragedy of classic proportions, with Microsoft as the protagonist and Ballmer as the hubris that drives him to his fatal excesses -- and maybe IBM/Linux as the nemesis waiting around the corner.
I am _so_ not looking forward to everything being run by IBM again
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
Who gives a shit what Ballmer thinks? Of course he's gonna talk shit about his competition, of course he's gonna say that the Microsoft way is the only way. It's his job.
Meanwhile, Apple has a decent lead in the online music market, their hardware is selling rather well, and their stuff works. Who cares what he has to say, as long as its empty crap talk? When he's presenting a concrete business product, let me know. Otherwise, you're just flamebaiting.
This year 1 billion mobile devices are deployed with it doubling to 2 billion this next year ..now how many desktops are delpoyed..
..Apple just hired people to put iTunes on J2me
Less than 1 billion..
The future is not MS PC on mobiles..
Its J2ME
Don't Tread on OpenSource
1) Any new computer purchased from Dell
2) Any new computer purchased from Gateway
3) Any new computer purchased from HP
4) Any new computer purchased from Compaq
5) Any new computer purchased from the company I work for
6) Any new computer purchased from GlobalComputer/TigerDirect under the "SysteMax" name
I really could go on and on. You sir, are in idot in the worst way; Or a troll. One of the two.
(Now, the above isn't to say that the users of said brand new computers won't 'borrow' some software from friends/family, but makes it a far cry less than "%100 stolded" as you had suggested. Rare indeed.)
bork bork bork!
Not after the standard Microsoft DRM-enabled photocopier hits the office floor. But this tongue-in-cheekiness reminds me that copiers apparently DO reject copying of certain items like currency. How long, honestly, do you think it will take before America concedes the point and puts a "document authorization mark" (like the 2D barcodes used by UPS) on each document made, which copiers will check before copying? Sure, we have billions and billions of pages of "legacy" documents with no such mark, but they could be stamped ... and we can see where this is going.
[You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
I guess its a good thing that Windows users are responsible and would never do something like steal music and put it on an iPod... even though Windows makes up around 90% of the installed user base.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
A single red cent, no. Many thousands of red cents, yes.
When will Windows be ready for the desktop?
What is this sweaty ogre talking about? I have 1605 songs, not one is illegal, they are either ripped from my own collection, or purchased from the iTMS. If iPod owners, were thieves, why would they be spending upwards of $500 on a music player? I am sure they will lobby congress for a legal monopoly on music now.
I hate sigs.
That last quote, isn't a confession that M$ plans on using monopoly power to leverage into a new market?
How do they get away with this shit?
Dang, what makes them believe that they are entitled to millions and care-free lives by making a couple of template "songs" about fucks and drugs?
His distinction doesn't even make sense. He says Windows Media has had DRM for years, and then somehow ties that to the majority of the iPod's music being stolen, presumably a veiled reference to the fact that iPod uses a different format.
;-) (Yes, yes, I know they've announced they'll support MP3.)
But that logic doesn't follow, because iPod's "paid" format ("Protected AAC") contains DRM (though in Apple's implementation is probably more forgiving and transparent than some alternatives). The "stolen" format he must be referring to is, therefore, MP3, a format that is also supported by all portable music players that support Windows Media!
Since Apple's music store - which only works with iPod - has by far the largest market share of all online music stores, there is actually more legitimately purchased downloaded music (to say nothing of legally purchased CDs that have then been ripped) in use on iPods than on players that support Windows Media. If there are "stolen" MP3s in use on iPod, then there are stolen MP3s in use on ANY player that supports MP3 in the same proportions. And even if we concede that there might be physically more stolen music on iPods, in numbers of songs, it's only because iPods so ridiculously vastly outnumber any competitive player...not because iPods somehow magically enable more easy theft, when it's MP3 - not the iPod's "scary different non-Windows Media format", which IS DRM'ed - that constitutes the "theft", which is possible on ANY other player! [1]
So, to sum up: nuthin' but FUD.
[1] Except perhaps Sony's.
And what does this prove? I could level the exact same claim at Windows users - most home copies of Windows are pirated (unless OEM) - and anyway, how does the music get onto the iPod?
Hmm, maybe via a computer. And Windows users are using the iPods too!
What MS embraces is less important than what consumers embrace, and they have a habit of not embracing restrictive formats. Like DIV-X (the old version, where you had to connect to get permission to play your movie); and DVD-A / SACD.
Jobs has said that he will open up AAC playback if the iPod market share drops below #1. Similarly, he will consider putting WMA playback on the iPod if the iTMS falls below #1.
But right now, despite the absolute lack of competition, the cheaper songs/players elsewhere - the iPod is #1, and so is the iTMS. Every time a consumer chooses either, they create a barrier for themselves to using another service. Who wants to change all their music formats, etc over?
Yeah, or Microsoft procrastinating in the OS market. Your analogy is flawed. Apple have created this market with one product - the product has defined the market. People don't want a music player, they want an iPod. And which music store is the only one to work with an iPod when they want to try legal downloaded music?
You guessed it.
Your point being? I think Ballmer's way off, and it is reflected by Microsoft's market share in this market. Consumers don't want MS DRM, and Apple has a better product all round.
-- james
Well, yeah right now most iPod users have pcs. Of course when Longhorn arrives, there will be a little problem uploading your music, and every now and then the entire iPod memory will be wiped.
You know that MS will be working hard for a solution...
From MS marketing, 2006:
"It's probably due to Apple's implementation of some standard."
"You could get a solution quicker if you switch to our new win-Pod(TM) that implements Microsoft standards. It uses a new version of Embedded Windows Media Player(TM). Here's a coupon for %75 off your purchase price, and we have a $20.oo rebate as well."
"But we'll keep working on that i-pod 'fix', don't you worry. When the 'fix' is in, you'll know it!"
Microsoft, The job isn't done until Lotus, Novell, Netscape, iPod won't run
Almost every MS product since its inception three decades ago was originally invented somewhere else- MS-DOS, Windows, BASIC, Multiplan, Words, Windows, MS-Tunes, etc. Some purchased, some was blatantly copied. MS has no business making this complaint.
They are really pissing me off with all this 'thief' crap.
Just because you have an MP3 does not mean you are a thief. just because you bought an OS-less PC doesn't mean you are a thief. Just because I own a soldering iron and am an EE doesnt mean I'm some 'evil hacker'..
I have 25GB on my 4G Ipod and not ONE song isn't from a CD I own.. I have several PC's, and NONE run some sort of pirated Microsoft OS.. Either I own a license, or its running a 'free' OS...
I'm sick and tired of being accused of something I'm not, and then getting legislation passed that restricts my activities, and increases their market share/profit. ( generic statement, this applies to most any 'media' industry )
To hell with them all. See how little of my money they continue to get from me..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
"Microsoft will steal a march.."
Sure, it starts with stealing a march.. then it's an April, followed by May and June, and before you know it you're wandering around with half an ill-gotten year bulging beneath your jacket.. after that it's down the slippery slope to stealing days of the week, and even whole decades if the habit goes unchecked.
Now what's worse? Grabbing a few little MP3s for listening on the go, or depriving the whole world of entire chunks of history. I think we know who the REAL criminals are here.
Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
Digital Rights Management is all about preventing people from using the tools they have paid for in the ways they want to use them. Often, DRM prohibits perfectly legal activities.
Digital Rights Management is one of the most serious threats to the general purpose computer, and to the freedom it affords us. The general public must be educated to the fact that the purpose of DRM isn't to protect them, but to protect large corporations from them.
50%? Are you kidding? It's rare to see a Windows computer with less than 100% pure, unadulterated, stolen shit in it
That certainly rings true among the people I know - at least with regards to their home computers. 100% of them run pirated copies of WinXP, pirated photoshop, pirated Office, etc...
Personally I think the likes of Abiword make a perfectly acceptable replacement for Word, at least for home users - and often times businesses would do just fine with it. I think Abiword is an upgrade from MS Word - others my not agree. But it's definitely faster to load, looks just as good (better in my opinion), uses less memory, and has more than enough features to keep home users, college students, and business people happy.
I'm not a huge fan of Open Office - not because there's anything wrong with it. It's just that I don't really need an Office Suite. (I imagine most home users don't.) But for those who do "need" it, I think it's a great substitute for the $300+ MS Office Suite.
For my own spreadsheet needs, I prefer Gnumeric because it feels very light weight while still having all the features I need. Plus I think it looks great and it's a heck of a lot faster to load up than OOo. The only problem with Gnumeric is that there isn't a Windows port (that I know of).
I also have several friends who pirate the "Pro" version of Trillian. I finally convinced my friend to give the Windows Port of gaim a try and he has been using it ever since. Bonus - download the encryption plugin for gaim and have secure messaging.
I don't know enough about Photoshop and image editing to know if The Gimp is an acceptable replacement. I've read several posts where people say it is *not* (an acceptable replacement.) I'll have to take their word for it. My image editing needs are very basic so gThumb is about all I really need.
I have another friend who pirates FTP software. With the existence of FileZilla, I fail to see the point. What can't FileZilla do?
A lot of people pirate WinZip. I have to admit that WinZip does have a pretty interface (if you use Windows), but if you don't want to pay for it, and you don't want to take the risk of infecting your Windows computer with a virus when you download a WinZip crack of Kazaa, then I recommend 7-zip as a free alternative. Also, the last time I saw WinZip (which admittedly was years ago) there were a few archive types it didn't handle.
There are so many great Free and Open Source alternatives available, even if you use Windows.
Get FireFox now
People who steal music are responsible for the thefts. Kind of like blaming the gun for the murder of a person when even if he or she didn't have the gun, he had a knife anyways. In other words, taking away the medium/gun/method isn't going to stop a crime from happening.
dance monkeyboy dance! Microsoft complaining about Apple users?! Oh, and of course, they and their users are lily-white and never steal a single thing. Snort! I have to remember not to drink a new cup of coffee when reading /. lest I blow it out my nose reading comments like this from the Ballmer B-boy Monkeyboy.
The 20 gig iPod holds 10,000 songs. At a buck a song, that's $10,000 to fill it up. I don't know anyone with that kind of money. Sure there are some old people, like myself, who own decades worth of CDs to rip, but a lot of young people are buying iPods.
It sounds to me that Microsoft's Portable Media Player will NOT play MP3s. However, if it ONLY plays DRM invested WMA files it will NOT sell.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
I think you're missing the point here. Basically, this can never be anything like a representative suvey. This is because:
Here is the difference between a success and a failure. Its the same one as thinking raising cigartte taxes will make people stop smoking and installing light rail will make people stop driving. When you are working in a free society, success comes from giving people what they want, not telling them what they want.
Look at MS. People wanted web browsers. They made IE. People wanted a media player, they got one bundled that did a good job of streaming video. They wanted a mailer, the got one. Yes now that there are problems with them people are moving to Mozilla based products, but this is a failure of Microsoft. They didn't give the people what they wanted (they don't want to have to be security experts to be able to browse the web).
People want to be able to have digital media with as few strings attached as can be so they don't have to become DRM gurus to listen to their jams in the car. This is where Windows Media player fails and the iPod/iTunes succeeds. Jobs thought about what the customers wanted and then did all he could to give it to them, putting in just enough DRM to keep the RIAA happy.
So the Windows folks can think they will win by putting in as much monopolistic protection as possible for MS and the RIAA/MPAA but it will fail. It will fail for the same reasons that all the other media stores and players have to date. They didn't give peole what they wanted.
Today is a gift. Save the receipt.
It means that when Microsoft tries to smush this market, like they have everything else, they will introduce a player that obviously will not play MP3, Vorbis, or any other non-DRM format. The question is, will anyone buy it?
The RIAA and MPAA hve done an incredible amount to UNDO what was purposely done - allow the consumer to copy their own stuff. But thanks to Billy G & co, there's this new notion of licensing vs. purchasing. So how long until you don't "buy" your CDs, you "license use of them?"
The whole thing stinks. This is bad news for the rights of the consumer.
...and Influence People the Microsoft Way" we show you how to insult everyone under 25.
Boring Old Fart (40, married, 3 kids...er no...make that 49, married, 3 grown up kids...it's been a long time)
Come on now, Steve. There are three ways to get music onto a portable digital music player: paid downloads, rip from CDs (or other source) one already owns, or to "steal" it from another source. In the paid downloads category the iTunes Music Store dominates. It's far and away the market leader and those tracks can only be played on the iPod. All the other players that are capable of playing Microsoft's Windows Media format with DRM can get music from a variety of paid download services. But if more people by far are downloading legitimately from iTunes, and necessarily are playing such legal, paid-for music on their iPods, doesn't it stand to reason that iPod owners are more likely to have legally downloaded music than users of other portable players? Furthermore, Mac users have demonstrated over the years that they will pay more for hardware/OS/software that they perceive to be better. The iTunes Music Store was launched first for Mac users because it was reasoned that they would be willing to pay for the quality and ease of using the legal channel over the free file sharing networks. To the extent that Mac users represent a higher percentage of iPod owners than of other brands, doesn't it also stand to reason that the iPod user base is more likely to pay for their content? This is not to say that there is not music from dubious sources, or "stolen" to use Balmer's term, on iPods just like on other players, but I think it very likely that iPods contain a lower percentage of such content than the Windows Media players.
"People who make music were always grossly overpaid and I don't think most of them deserve it."
Bullshit. You don't know what you're talking about. Do you know why there are so many one hit wonders? So many excellent bands that never take off?
Because the record companies screw them over, and only the ones that manage to sell millions of one CD actually manage to go on. Most record contracts require you to sell a given number of CDs (depends on the size of your contract) just to break even with them, and most bands don't make this. With any of the big record companies, if a CD costs $10, the artist can consider himself fortunate if he gets 50c per CD. And then he gets taxed for that too.
It's people like you who cause the RIAA and MPAA to sue ordinary citizens. Freeloaders who show no appreciation or respect for musicians hard work (excpet maybe if you listen to Britney Spears - the sooner she goes out of business, the better).
Most - as in 99.999% of musicians are overworked and underpaid. Most can't afford the instruments they play on. It's only the handful at the top who gets pushed by the record companies, and all the sex_sells/idol/whatever other commercial crap, who make it really big financially, and that's only because they sell millions of copies.
sigaar
The critical mass has to come from the PC,
Yup. Just like USB. Oh, wait...
"Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
Hence PC users are Thieves.....
WOW look at that you can spin the FUD two ways here... Why hasnt this guy died of a exploding heart as he was jumping up and down like a overweight gorrila yet????
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
Who wouldn't want 100 dollar bils?
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
Just because you and your friends steal software doesn't mean that everyone does. I've had my computer for 4 years. Every single piece of software on it was either free or purchased legally. And there has to be a reason that Best Buy has rows and rows of boxed software. Someone is purchasing software.
Taking into account that songs on iTunes music service are:
1. 100% Legal
2. DRM, but with restrictions that people can actually tolerate.
3. Sold over 130,000,000 songs to date (in less than 2 years since it's launch)
and that:
4. iPods are legal, and support a DRM format, unlike most MP3 players out there.(There is no problem with not supporting a DRM format either, are we all suddenly theives for not encoding DRM in our fair-use music rips?)
and also that:
Apple have supported more DRM in Quicktime before MS even bothered to see it as a market.
Then I really don't see any justifcation for any of the comments made about Apple computer. Sounds more like a technique to add some attention to his announcement.
All the professors I've had in college so far all require soft copies of assignments in Office format. Grades are lowered or not counted for other formats. You're going to tell me to get the Student Edition of Office for $100 but that seems like appeasement rather than a solution to the problem.
I'm on top of my game like I'm standin' on Xbox.
creating music is an artform, you're not supposed to create art because you want to make money off of it.. you're supposed to do it cause you love doing it. I know many musicians who never expect to make it big and will keep working for shit pay, or no pay at all. Greedy musicians will scream at any fan who doesn't pony up, that makes me sick.
MABASPLOOM!
As far as volumes are concerned, Apple sells pretty much every iPod they can produce. It was the thing on kids back to school want lists, it will be the thing on many people's Christmas lists, and it will continue to be the de facto standard for portable music players. Sony's new Walkman, what a joke! I'm not converting everything to their proprietary format. Everyone else? What do you see marketing campaigns on MTV, CNBC, CN, etc. for? Rio, nope. iRiver, nada. Dell, not really. Apple's iPod in clever, catchy ads. Apple's iTMS servers handle the demand smoothly and are never /.'d. And to increase volume, the main piece to worry about is the bandwidth, easy enough.
The article is merely propaganda for those who are too damn ignorant to understand. "DRM...years" "DRM...not been that easy to use" "My 12-year-old at home doesn't want to hear..." Sounds to me like he's shooting himself in the foot and doesn't understand what his customers want. Oh well, that's Microsoft for you.
Amigori
"The quality of life is determined by its activites."--Aristotle
Way to go Steve! Nothing makes me want to buy more Microsoft products than being called a thief. What a wonderful new way to get customers. You know what, I feel like going out and buying a Mac right now...
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
It's people like you who cause the RIAA and MPAA to sue ordinary citizens.
It's the flawed system that promotes the greed of the corporation which causes the RIAA and MPAA to sue ordinary citizens. So-called 'piracy' is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself.
Freeloaders who show no appreciation or respect for musicians hard work
Sounds likes you are describing the labels & RIAA to me.
Most - as in 99.999% of musicians are overworked and underpaid.
This was true long before Napster was born. In fact, it was true long before Shawn Fanning was born.
Well, alright, in my country DVD movies are quite a bit more expensive though. More like $40.
My gripe is not so much how much CDs cost, but how much of it, or rather, how little of the money gets paid to the artist in the end. Let me give you a little inside info (I'm a musician, this is from first hand experience).
A record company will sign an artist, pay them a smallish amount to live off while they record a CD. Usually the deal will be for a couple of CDs, with a time limit. Then they will, ideally, promote the band, pay for the studio time, basicall cover all their expenses. This money is not for free or even in exchange for the band's work. It is a loan to the band, charged at interest rates that would make any loanshark worth his salt's eys water.
Now, lets say the band gets 50c for each CD sold. (For a yet unknown band, this is daydreaming. Some of the top guys, I'm thinking Sting, Celine Dion, Enrique, ect. - artists who often sell millions of CDs per album, might be able to negotiate a slightly better deal, but not much)
The band has to sell CDs until the money they owe the record label is paid in full out of their cut from the CDs. Many artists never manage this, so they remain in debt to the record company, who can (and do) use this to make each consecutive contract worse for the artist. Many artists never manage to repay everything. Sometimes, at the end of the artist's sell-by date, the record company might scrap the debt. Which would mean the artist never made much more than he/she needed to survive and cover their gear, while the record company made a small fortune out of them - remember the other $9.50 did not go towards paying off the artist debt, the record company made that clean.
So, yeah, the Record labels "lose" loads more out of music piracy than the artists, but the artist lose too, and compared to what most of them get paid, they lose a lot more. Most muso are certainly not overpaid, and it's a little unfair to penalise the musicians for the recording industry's greed.
sigaar
So you see, children, much like the mythical "copyright" the whole concept of "recorded" "music" is a mental fiction and at odds with the natural order of things. Kill your iPod now!
or something.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
This comment was coming from the CEO of the biggest corporate criminal in history! Most of Microsoft's money has been stolen through their leverage of an illegal monopoly. It'll be a cold day in hell before I listen to a lecture from this criminal.
/bin/fortune | slashdotsig.sh
Grossly overpaid!
The record companies may be, but the artist aren't. I spent a good chunk of my life being a professional musician and I can tell you for sure that at least 80% of the artists out there go in DEBT to make an album. Merchandise and touring is the only way to make money.
Let's not forget that Linux didn't have the volume, either. Google didn't have it either. Rarely does anything have volume when it's young. Quantity (volume) is not the only factor. There is something to be said about quality, too! :)
Simpy
Here's the truth about music and money. The typical contract signed by a band usually includes an advance. This isn't a signing bonus that they just get to keep. It's an advance on all future sales, minus all production and advertising costs, so in other words profit. Therefore if WB puts $2M into a project, it must gather that much in order to recover the costs. If you got $500K as an advance and only $1M was made from the effort, you are 100% responsible for paying that $500K back to WB!
Also, in 90% of the contracts signed by new bands, a three record deal is signed for the label. 100% of publishing rights from the first (usually the second as well) album goes to the label. Most bands don't survive the second album so it's usually a moot point.
So yes, $0.50 per disc means a lot to some of these bands. I personally think they should get a lot more, but the RIAA is in full support of the labels not the artist, but they still get something from our purchases.
Peace
-Apple has already made a deal with HP for the HP branded iPod (now shipping) and bundling iTunes with HP windows machines.
-Apple have also integrated their device with BMW and VW Beetle cars and Alpine makes an adaptor kit for other vehicles.
-Virgin Airlines offers iPods to use in the first class lounge.
-Some cruise lines are looking at renting iPods to guests.
-Apple has Licensed playback software to Motorola for inclusion in their cell phones.
Apple already has that critical mass by having captured over 60% of the market even before HP jumped on the band wagon just through direct marketing to mac and windows users.
PS. You might also want to take note that the iPod is a status symbol today and many music stars like to brandish them in public (especially diamond encrusted ones). MSFT is not considered cool these days and your "developer, developers, developer" song combined with your monkeyboy dance are partly to blame for this.
PPS. Get some better antiperspirant when you go on stage 'cause large armpit sweat stains are uncool.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
By Ballmer's logic everyone who owns an MP3 player that supports an unprotect formats like MP3 is a theif. Also wouldn't Windows users be classified as theives as well because most P2P application run on Windows, and I bet the majority of the people sharing and downloading are running Windows.
Microsoft should work on making their products more secure (god knows they need to) and save the mud linging for the politicians.
All of the very hard-core Linux users I know (myself included) are strictly anti-piracy. It also helps that we have decent jobs; it's harder to justify "stealing" a $10 album when you can easily afford to buy it. That's not to say that Linux-using pirates don't exist. I simply have never met any. Windows users often seem to have stolen copies of games, movies, software, etc. They have a culture of piracy that we thankfully don't seem to have in Linux circles.
Nice attempt at painting with a broad brush there. Pity you're not accurate.
Coming soon - pyrogyra
Glad MS has the high ground on theivery issues. Otherwise they may be considered hypocritical on this subject.
Ballmer's company stole just about every idea they've ever had from other companies, so if I were him, I'd tone down this "stealing" rhetoric.
You know what? I'll even call a spade a spade - I don't have any intention of using iTunes at 99 cents. The record companies dropped the ball, and I am now used to getting for free what I had previously paid 18 bucks a pop for. Do I feel bad? Not in the least.
/. won't like this, but they'll have to accept the fact that we're quietly moving into an era where the consumer - the person that both the creator and the corps rely on - is being returned to his rightful place of power.
They dropped the ball when they made huge scenes at press conferences with Lars and Hilary standing side by side to fight the evil p2p'ers. They dropped the ball when they refused to work towards some mutually beneficial pricing scheme that would *gasp* give both artists and consumers a fair shake! Instead, they charge 1.00 a song, which can run you into paying MORE than you would had you just bought the CD.
Meanwhile, I can get the same thing for free. I provide the bandwidth, they have no packaging costs, why should I pay MORE than I would for the physical media? Because they say so? Fuck them. I know the IP apologists on
What's that? You want to "license" me your content and sign my rights away with a clickthrough EULA? That's so cute... fuck you. In case you haven't noticed yet, you are on the losing end of a battle that has been going on for almost 5 years now. The only way you'll win is to make it easier to buy your shit than it is to steal it. That means *gasp* reduced profit margins for the corps, and *2x gasp!* no more bullshit rockstar lifestyles for the golden idols!
This means that the creation of music, movies, etc. would become...*shudders*...ANOTHER NORMAL JOB that you would actually have to be GOOD at and keep IMPROVING on to keep your position! Holy shit, we can't have that now, can we?!
The best revenge against Steve Ballmer for this anti-MP3 nonsense is for all of us to run out and buy an Apple Macintosh or three. It doesn't matter if you actually use them, or give them out as Christmas presents, or sell them on eBay -- the simple act of Slashdotting Mac sales will jump-start Apple's marketshare by several percentage points, giving Ballmer and Gates another thing to worry about...
--R.J.
Electric-Escape.net
1. most musicians make very little money from cd sales.
2. most record companies like to sell music rather expensively in order to maximize their profits, they can do this because they have an oligopoly market with quite high barriers to entry.
3. many people like to download/share/'steal' music, and a fair number of them would like to see the people who made the music paid properly, even if record companies are somewhat bad at this.
4. you can find contact details for many musicians or their agents by googling.
OK, so I have a genius plan.
If you download something that you like, rather than buying the cd, why not send a cheque to the person who made the music/their producer/someone else involved in the recording?
They'll do better financially from that than they would from buying a cd anyway and you won't be supporting market distorting monopolist business models that have yet to catch up to the reality of the situation.
The recording industry is fast becoming an irrelevancy to a large number of people and no draconian laws/drm/suing kids is actually going to change the situation.
just a thought...
charlie harvey's website
The problem with this whole thread is that first it has to be understood that Ballmer is a corporate asshole. Everything he says has to be filtered through that concept. Worse, he's a corporate asshole that repeatedly and loudly Doesn't Get It when it comes to customers. They aren't consumer units or little thieving roaches. They have the RIGHT to store and protect the concepts they've have a license to on *any* medium. As much as it pains me, Donald Trump Gets It (at least he says he gets it in the OfficeDepot spots). If your primary mission is "maximizing value to shareholders after I line my pockets" ... its all screwed. If your primary mission is "taking care of my customers, keep them happy, and the money will flow", then you have a sustainable clue.
"It makes me laugh, the 12-y-o son of the man running the most powerful IT company in the world gets it, but Ballmer himself doesn't."
Funny, it makes me want to cry...
Was discussing this sort of thing in general with a friend this morning, and we both agreed that we need some young blood injected into America's political matrix. Until we get some tech-savvy people who understand what American's want from their technology and don't pander to what the corporations try to force on us, we're gonna be stuck in a downward spiral of increasingly draconian restrictions.
http://thechubbyferret.net - Ferret pictures and informative links.
Microsoft is going to make the "digital home" a reality? Oh, God forbid! There is no way that their technologies can reliably drive the complex workings of a smarthouse, without a resident IT department.
Here's a news flash for you, Microsoft... Apple is a LOT closer to the Digital Home than you are. While you're building smarthome showrooms (supported by an IT department) to impress HGTV, Apple has shipped Airport Express, making simple wireless audio distribution a reality. That's just step one.
Apple's only two market-/mindshare problems are simple ones: 1-) Lack of advertising for anything but iPod, and 2-) lack of a sub-$800 model that appeals to the masses. I mean, put yourself in the computer-buyer's shoes. Most of them don't know what they want... I know, I worked at CompUSA. If they see the Dell next to a comparably priced (but more capable) Mac, they'll take the cooler product.
Yeah, surprise... innovation DOES win, but only if the price is close enough. I understand Apple's desire to be BMW, but I think they'd be better off modeling themselves after GM. They've got the Cadillacs down pat, but they need a Chevrolet model.
Let's see
VAX32
Netscape code
Java (use, replace, then disable)
Stolen security and networking from UNIX
Apple's interface
Then there's the subtle criminal stuff like;
Forcing OEMs to be exclusive or charging more (blackmail)
Integrating players and browsers after agreeing with the Feds not to (contempt)
Swearing you could not de-integrate said featured in your court case in the US, then suddenly producing a RUssian and European stripped version within 6 months of losing your case there. (Perjury)
Having your CEO SWEAR that M$ never intended to block out Netscape from the browser market then discovering emails that said you actually did (more perjury)
Claiming you have a "more secure" OS than Linux when a 6 year old has found security holes (poor development, lying, stupidity)
Yep, when I think of ethics and upstanding citizens, Microsoft is the company I want preaching ethics to me! Could there be a larger group of assholes on the planet?
"Curiosity killed the cat, but for a while I was a suspect."- Steven Wright
The most common format of music on an Windows PC is stolen!
When you can't win on facts, win on personal attacks. It's nice to see that Ballmer is starting to resort to this, that means he is losing.
Most CEO's, VP's and Directors have iPODS with the JBL creature speakers. Apple is getting a lot of visibility as an innovator at high levels and more opportunities and partnerships are flowing their way. This is scaring the hell out of Ballmer who desperately needs this piece of the action to grow or at least sustain earnings.
I own an iPOD and it's the best game in town for MP3's and portable file storage. Ballmer knows it and his only chance is to discredit Apple as a promoter of piracy. Apparently Ballmer hasn't learned the same lessons that IBM learned with microchannel architecture and that Sony learned with it's memory stick and proprietary audio format. I hope Ballmer keeps going full steam ahead and obliviously sails on, right into the iceberg. Go Steve GO! You're right, everyone who doesn't agree with you is wrong. Show the world that you are right!
Just so you know, sharing MP3s may be illegal, but considering it doesn't fall into an easy category like, oh, "theft," it's anything but self-evident that it's immoral. And FWIW, this is from a philosophy/ethics and music graduate.
"I made my mistake at university, gave one of my first cds to a kid across the hall. within a day, it was smeared across the whole campus, and couple of the houses off site."
Not to sound trite, but you do realize that there are people reading that line and wishing they could be in your position. If you do not have a record contract you don't have publicity. If you're on the internet, there's too much noise for you to have publicity. Fine, you didn't authorize it and obviously it annoyed you, but have you really understood--everybody on that campus apparently listened to what you had. From the rest of your message, you seem to think that people are just falling over to listen to amateur unsigned music.
Well, guess what--music has been a buyer's market for a long time, and no matter whether you use traditional means or not, you got an opportunity for free that better musicians than you worked harder to fail at getting. No matter what you say about it not earning you money to buy new instruments, it still got you a lot closer to it than keeping the music locked up tight in your closet. If you were Britney Spears you'd have an argument about some potential sales lost, but you have to practically (or literally, I guess, with a typical record contract) pay people to listen to your music if you're unknown.
Again, I majored in music, I've published works and so on. Even if it was an unfinished demo, you had publicity that most people only dream about. Really, you seem to have known my argument before I said it, in an abstract way, but you don't seem to really get that it's just going to get harder and harder to get anyone to listen after you graduate, and most people in college can't get "the whole college and a few houses off campus" interested enough to listen even if they're popular while in college.
My argument is not that "people are trading MP3s for the good of the artist," but it's not "people are trading MP3s because they're immoral thieves," either. In actuality, people trade MP3s because people want to listen to music. There is nothing moral or immoral about that fact, no matter what your post-ethical legal standpoint is. So cheer up and try to stop being angry at people for the damnable sin of being curious about your music.
He wasn't painting anything. From the grandparent:
That's not to say that Linux-using pirates don't exist. I simply have never met any.
He acknowledges that some linux users are pirates.
Personally, I have a theory that supports his assumptions. In my experience as a part-time consultant, most people that use Windows at home are unaware of the fact that the so-called "casual copying" that they do is illegal. I've stopped trying to educate them about it because of all of the arguments I get into (arguing with customers is bad for business). I have a feeling that if they understood the moral and legal implications of "borrowing" their neighbor's MS Office installation disc or Norah Jones music CD, many of them would not do it.
By contrast, most linux users are experienced techies who know more about copyright laws and EULAs. Therefore, assuming the same moral thread can be applied, they would not be likely to pirate software or music.
This is, as I said, based on my own experiences with people, as well as my own moral and intellectual progress over the past several years. In the "quickie slashdot poll", I truthfully answered 0% downloaded (illegally or otherwise), 2% my own recordings, and 98% ripped from my own CDs, which is fair use. Accordingly, 100% of the software on my computer is either open source or otherwise legally obtained from the author, including a few little programs written by me in my quest to learn C++.
I can't claim, as the grandparent does, that every Linux user I know is not a pirate. My brother still downloads music from questionable sources, and one of my good friends thinks nothing of using pirated OEM copies of Microsoft software. However, I am the person who introduced both of them to Linux, and hopefully I will be able to convince them of the illegality and immorality of what they do.