Slashdot Mirror


Bill Gates Swears Vow Against 'Son of iPod'

Future Linux-Guru writes "The LA Times is running an article on Microsoft's efforts to preempt any single manufacturer from dominating the online video market. Among the scarier revelations is the development of AACS, a new already approved security system designed to prevent piracy on HD DVDs, which subjects users to forced upgrades." From the article: "Whichever way it shakes out, Gates vows not to play the victim in 'Son of iPod.' After learning a hard lesson in the digital music business, 'we're really having to work more closely with partners in the hardware industry and content industry, to really think through the whole end-to-end experience and make it better,' Gates said. 'That's where we've done our mea culpa. We are fixing that.'"

18 of 393 comments (clear)

  1. Laughable by sgant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft's efforts to preempt any single manufacturer from dominating the online video market.

    I think he means "any OTHER single manufacturer". I'm sure Microsoft will be just find and dandy if THEY were the single dominating online video provider.

    --

    "Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
    1. Re:Laughable by P-Nuts · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I don't think MS wan't to be in on the content-provision side, Apple seem to have proven that (for music at least) large profit isn't to be had.

      Sure, but Apple aren't really in the content-provision business. The reason they have iTMS and iTunes is mainly to encourage people to buy iPods. Just the same as the reason they write MacOS is to sell computers.

  2. Who are Microsoft making their products for ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful


    because everyday it seems the "customer" isnt the person who buys the product

  3. ... done our mea culpa? by dscho · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not parse this sentence does.

  4. I am your Father by urbanshepherd · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is the son of an iPod an iPea?

  5. Define irony by FidelCatsro · · Score: 5, Funny

    Microsoft Taking a stand against monopolys

    --
    The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
  6. Bill gates means by Arthur+B. · · Score: 5, Funny

    "we're really having to work more closely with partners in the hardware industry and content industry, to really think through the whole end-to-end experience and make it better"

    work more closely -> control
    think thorugh the whole experience -> control
    make it better -> abuse our vertical dominant position

    --
    \u262D = \u5350
  7. DRM by dnoyeb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well all the current state of DRM on DVD did for the movie industry is allow them to force you to watch a bunch of bullshit trailers for other movies before you can watch the one you purchased. Every time.

  8. Re:Son of iPod? by matt21811 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The iPod equivalent for movies is a laptop.

    The Apple iTunes music store is successful because the iPod is sccuessful. Not the other way around. The fact that the iTMS has a good range and reasonable DRM just ensures repeat custom.

    The only way Bill will lose out in this market is if he fails to get his software loaded on most laptops or he creates a truely crap product even by MS standards. I dont see what all the fuss is about.

  9. An approach that's doomed to failure by @madeus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I fully expect Microsoft will take the same sort of route they have always taken, by focusing almost exclusively on selling their vision to content producers, rather than focusing on making a product that appeals to the market (and watching as the content producers hop on board).

    Apple have been successful with their music store because of course they have made it easy for novice users to access, purchase and manage content. The Microsoft media player is in stark contrast a hideously confusing application as far as most people are concerned, and is an excellent example of why Microsoft will not succeed unless they radically change their approach (which on past form, I do not expect they will).

    Getting buy-in from publishers is essential in the long run, but by pandering to them to the extent Microsoft have done (in an attempt to get them on-board), all semblance of a marketable product has been lost, because the focus has been on building a product they want to produce, rather than on one people actually want to buy.

    Even if all the major content production companies vow to get behind a Microsoft devised solution, consumers will just largely ignore it and continue to rely on established ways of getting content (either legal DVD's or illegal P2P downloads) until they are offered something they are actually comfortable using.

    You have to wonder what's wrong with Microsoft's corporate structure when, with their vast resources and many talented people, they can't even build a useable media player (let alone content delivery and management system). It's so tragic, it's funny.

  10. in the bedroom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    is where it will fail. Right now i can pipe most things i watch onto the bedroom mini LCD. I dont imagine that an end to end DRM solution will like this much, never mind the video senders etc ppl use. how does this add up to an improved customer experence if i can only watch on approved hardware?

  11. Other things Bill Gates swore by by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 5, Funny

    There won't be anything we won't say to people to try and convince them that our way is the way to go.
    --
    In the decade ahead I can predict that we will provide over twice the productivity improvement that we provided in the '90s."
    --
    Let's face it, the average computer user has the brain of a Spider Monkey.
    --
    If you can't make it good, at least make it look good.
    --
    Microsoft programs are generally bug-free. If you visit the Microsoft hotline, you'll literally have to wait weeks if not months until someone calls in with a bug in one of our programs. 99.99% of calls turn out to be user mistakes. I know not a single less irrelevant reason for an update than bugfixes.
    The reasons for updates are to present more new features.

    (sources)
    http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/b/bill_g ates.html
    http://www.antioffline.com/HUM/bill.gates.quotes.h tml

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  12. Think it won't work? by Puls4r · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hey, you've got DRM on your DVD's and MOST people barely notice it.

    Except of course when they reach the FBI warning and can't fast forward past it. And as much as my wife bitched about the annoyance of having 8-10 tracks prior to the movie, she's come to accept it because.... EVERY DVD has it.

    So down the road, when we're force to buy a new monitor with our new computer, well, we won't think much more about it than we do when we get a new phone with our cell plan.

    The only way this is going to fail is if the companies can't hack out a good standard. If it becomes too much of a hassle, THEN it will fail. If my new monitor won't work on a different computer that's also new, or if I'm severely limited by monitor choice, that MIGHT make enough of a difference for me to choose another alternative. But I doubt it.

  13. What's the incentive? by rolfwind · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No one wants to buy into a crippled system and consumers are getting more savvy to these type of things. I hear enough complaints about the regional encoding in DVDs and players and the market found a way aroud that (region 0).

    Sadly, while people are too lazy to vote/voice against things like DMCA, they still vote with their dollars.

    iTunes is an example of a system that provides assurance to the music industry while being flexible enough for consumers to use - like being able to share music with friends.

    Napster on the other hand is a more inflexible model and also seems like a traitor in some respects:
    http://p2pnet.net/story/5521

    The thing also with HD DVDs is that right now the DVD is an entrenched market that's good enough for most people. Most people don't even own the right TVs to make use of the enhanced resolution. So what is the incentive to move away from DVDs? Hell, VCR's had good enough resolution but the killer was the ability to go anywhere in the movie like a CD (and the smaller size of discs).

    If people percieve that HD DVD's or PAIDFOR online downloads are severely restricted, what incentive do they have to move away from DVD?

    Resolution they can't take advantage of/notice in most cases? 1 hour wait times until the hour long FBI warning goes away because it stops all those pirates? Compulsory previews?

  14. Funny by Evro · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Several people have already posted about the irony of Bill Gates complaining about another company's monopoly. But I find it amusing that after years of attempts to sell music online, by companies from all over the spectrum, people seem to have chosen Apple's iTunes for its sheer end-to-end simplicity without introducing annoying DRM that gets in the user's way. Because of that, the market has rewarded them with most of the business. In other words, if they are now a monopoly, it's due to customers choosing their product, unlike Microsoft's monopoly, which was created through exclusive deals with hardware manufacturers and technological lock-in.

    --
    rooooar
  15. End-to-end experience really a goal? by dpbsmith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about an end-to-end experience in which I "buy" a video, I "own" it, it is then "mine" to use as I wish, I can "keep" it as long as I like, I can "play" it over and over again, I can "fast forward" or "rewind" to any portion of it it at any time, I can use any player I like from any manufacturer, and I can "lend" it to a friend... ...you know, just like VHS?

    Doesn't seem hard to grasp or difficult to implement.

    Unless (gasp!) he's lying about the end-to-end user experience really begin their main concern.

  16. Microsoft Strategy by Mr_Silver · · Score: 5, Insightful
    One thing I notice that most posters haven't got is the fact that Microsoft doesn't just provide functionality for end users, they are also in to provide functionality to corporations that can ensure that they make more money.

    Take DRM, Microsoft isn't probably that interested in it, however the music and film industries are and Microsoft sees the fact that getting them on board will help to ultimately boost it's bottom line.

    These music and film companies want to sell content to customers over the internet and to their PC, but they don't want any chance of potential piracy. Microsoft is activily courting their requirement, not because customers want to do less with their content, but because MS can turn to those companies and say "hey, you complained that computers were insecure, but Longhorn means you can sell secure content and we are here to help you achieve that".

    Microsoft's biggest advantage is that when Longhorn comes out, it will be pre-loaded onto computers and when Bob gets downloadable video content for his PC, Frank will want some of that too although he'll find that XP just doesn't cut it and he has to upgrade.

    Look to the money. There are huge amounts to be made in music and video downloads, however Microsoft has to include functionality (DRM) into their computers to be able to persuade those companies that their content isn't copyable otherwise they'll never dip their toes into that market. When they do (through the assurances of Microsoft that the PC can ensure secure content stays secure) I can only assume that they'll also have to use a MS subscription based service to serve that content and all the associated licence fees for wrapping their content into the MS DRM.

    In short, including DRM in Longhorn opens up another market for Microsoft to dominate. They'll force people who want to have downloadable video to upgrade and also gain licencing fees from their DRM solution used by the content providers under the illusion that their content really is secure.

    --
    Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
  17. Re:The trouble with the black market by Trelane · · Score: 5, Informative
    You can complain about copy protection all you want. But you must recognise it is there to cut into black marketeers profits, linux users and other consumers are just the collatoral damage of that war.
    Actually, no. Generally, the black marketeers will have either inside sources to the un-DRMed originals, or they will have the resources to break the protection. (Bear in mind that US/Western copyright isn't accepted everywhere (e.g. Iran), and that all it takes is for one entity to un-lock the content for it to be loosed on the black markets!) The best that DRM aims at is keeping the average user from doing what the entity publishing the content (usually the record companies or movie producers) doesn't want them to do. This may be copying to share with a friend, transcoding the DVD to watch on a Palm, or watching the video on a player which hasn't licensed the DRM scheme (for instance, any non-embedded linux, BSD, BeOS, OS/2, Amiga, or other small OS; embedded Linux has at least one legal player you can buy from). Additionally, it has the annoying side-effect of not letting me, for instance, keep my CDs and DVDs in a nice, safe location and storing the actual movies on a big RAID and NFS-mounting them to my notebook or whatever in order to play them (or transcoding and streaming them to my palm).

    So actually, the Digital Restrictions being Managed by Apple, MSFT, and the record and movie houses is leveled directly at you, not the black marketeer.

    --

    --
    Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.