Slashdot Mirror
Jobs' Invitation To Microsoft a Trap?
An anonymous reader writes "Chris Seibold over at Apple Matters, has written up an interesting analysis on Steve Jobs' suggestion that Microsoft make their own mp3 player. He argues that it is more bait than business plan, a deft move by Steve Jobs to lure Microsoft into a can't-win war. The key, according to the article, is the licensing of FairPlay." From the article: "The folks who stick with Microsoft get to fight over, roughly, twenty percent of the market. The folks that go with Apple would be aligning themselves with what has become the industry standard. The players that license FairPlay would have access to the iTunes store, backwards compatibility with the songs consumers have already purchased, and a chance to compete on a perfectly level playing field with the iPod. It doesn't take a Stanford MBA to deduce that the potential rewards of opting to use FairPlay far outstrip the rewards of going with PlaysForSure."
... a monopoly? Wow. Slashdot actually endorsing monopolies now.
From the article:
"Jobs reasons that since iTunes and the iPod use the vertical integration model that Microsoft could use the same tactic to finally relegate the iPod to the technical trash bin. In theory, the system would work as follows: Microsoft would bundle a music playing program with every PC that, of course, pointed to an iTunes like music store. The model would be completed when people buy a Microsoft produced digital audio player. Consumers, being the lazy slugs they are, would take the path of least resistance. Inevitably, iPod marginalization would ensue."
Did Microsoft get in trouble for this sort of anti-competitive bundling before? If so, are they really stupid enough to try it again on such a large scale?
In soviet russia, You ask not what country do for you, but what you do for country!
Oh wait...
Does Apple even have any plans on licensing FairPlay, or is this another blogger speculating about the mighty Apple?
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
Whatever happened to the days of throwing a hammer at big blue (the "80%" market share at the time) or "thinking different"? Seems that Jobs is quick to flip when he finds himself in a position of power instead of the small-time player (pun not intended).
To the consumer, the underlying problem is still there. Whether it's iDRM or M$DRM, I still have to jump through hoops to get anything approaching fair use out of the music I buy.
Give a man a beer and he wastes an hour. Teach a man to brew and he wastes a lifetime.
Call me crazy, but I read a bunch of false assumptions into the summary.
1. "make their own player" e.g. hardware
No, they wouldn't make their own. They would license an OEM product at relatively little cost to Microsoft. The DRM/WMP (big-money investment) is done, the actual "player" is commodity hardware. Connecting it to WMP can't be so much work.
2. "make their own player" e.g. market strategy
I don't follow it so closely but I imagine there are quite a few Microsoft MP3 DRM licensees. That doesn't stop Microsoft from actually marketing a player, but I have a feeling they are trying to out-commoditize Apple. Commoditizing is what Microsoft knows how to do.
3. Apple's "Fair Play"
Is it available to anyone who wants to make an mp3 player? Last time I checked HP got the whole package from Apple. Apple's style tends to include everything, not just the DRM part. Different platforms is definitely a different case (cell phones) but for an "mp3 player" I doubt Apple is dying to play the compete against fellow licensees who offer their device at a lower price game. It's *never* worked for them.
I'm sure Microsoft will try to compete more effectively with Apple, as someone with some OEM experience, I don't see it happening quite the way the article tries to make it seem.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
I think Steve just wants a competitor to push the bar one up for Apple. Right now Apple is monopolizing digital music and that's making them stagnate around the same designs. There's no reason to go above and beyond right now, competition can be healthy. I'm sure Jobs realizes there's not a single other company in the world that could give them a run for their money right now in this particular market.
Which reminds me of that article about Bill Gates trying to fumigate his fortunes like the robber barons of old. Unfortunately, Microsoft is a sleeping giant right now, it doesn't have the stomach for competition like it once did. It lacks that carnivorous drive to kill that made it such a juggernaut. Jobs' is kicking the dragon trying to get it to wake up. It must be frustrating for him.
Personally, I prefer Microsoft products. On one hand I feel a bit better that MS is no longer the three headed beast it once was. It redeems them a little in my eyes that they're flesh and bone like everyone else. But, I miss the energy and innovation, they pushed themselves and their competitors once. They could again, but it doesn't look like they will.
I just speculate that Steve feels the same way.
It's the end of a golden era.
It seems to me that the name PlaysForSure is an attempt to apply the old Windows monopolist playbook to a field where they don't have a monopoly. To say that a song 'plays for sure' on a particular box is to say everyone has this kind of box, so you know the software to play the song is there.
;-)
Unfortunately for Microsoft, everyone does *not* have this kind of box, and PlaysForSure files won't play on the boxes most people have. It's a complete sham.
We're not talking about playing WMA's on your desktop computer any more. Everyone that has an iPod has AAC support on their iPod and their desktop machine. In fact PlaysForSure files won't play on an iPod, and won't play on a PlaysForSure player owner's Macintosh if they happen to have one.
None of this is to say that Microsoft's market share isn't large enough to lure away some users that don't even want to have to load iTunes on their desktops - though the OEM's have started installing iTunes, so that approach may not work either. Still, iPods can't talk to Outlook or display Word docs, so someday if the PocketPC model wins out as the portable device of choice, then Apple's in trouble. MS's monopoly magic would then take over.
The only *real* lock-in Apple has is all the FairPlay songs that iPodders have paid to download. That's a pretty big incentive for an iPod owner to make their next mp3 player an iPod too - if they've been paying for iTunes downloads. So whoever mentioned MS converting FairPlay songs may have a point. Good thing there's the DMCA
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
No-one needs an iPod now. It's wanting one. It's the fashion.
There's MP3-player phones now and the iPod still sells like cold beer on a hot day - why? Marketing. Hype. Fashion.
If Apple can keep that up, they can keep up the iPod sales for years provided they keep coming out with new ideas to put on them so people will keep buying the latest and greatest - for every person who's happy with their Gen-1 original iPod there'll be 2 more who are going to be shelling out £100-£250 every 18 months or less to get the new, updated video-holo-iPod.
Frankly, unless Apple redesign iPods to be three feet wide, only availible puke-green and bundled with a free kick to the face, I can't see Apple's sales dropping off dramatically anytime soon, regardless of what Motorola, Microsoft or anyone else does.
Dealing with lawyers would be a lot less tedious if they all looked like Casey Novak.
DRM-free mp3 files beat the hell out of both FairPlay and Playz-Fer-Sher!
My mp3s play on all of my computers, all of my mp3 players (2 ipods, oakley glasses (they were a GIFT), empeg car, xbox media center...
FairPlay plays on a few of my macs at a time; only 4 because, sadly, one of my "authorized" computers got blown away when I reinstalled the OS on that box. I'm sure there's a way to resolve this, but its one of those steps that "keeps honest users" from using the iTunes Store. So I can't play FairPlay songs on 2 macs (more than 5 in this household... is Steve Jobs trying to tell me I buy too many boxes from him?), 2 PCs, my car, my non-ipod mp3 players, or my xboxes. That ain't fair. I've stopped using the iTMS, since I'd have to convert them to mp3 if I want to listen to them (and that's against the license).
PlaysForSure - somehow I doubt those will play anywhere in my house. Hmm... Maybe on the windows laptop we keep around for configuring a couple of devices that are *only* supported by Windows, but sometimes I like to listen to music outside of my office cabinets, where these files SurelyWon'tPlay.
For now I'm still "stuck" buying CDs and ripping them myself. The only real drawback is having to store all of the physical media (as backups) in boxes somewhere in my basement once its ripped to disk.
blog
Seriously, the iTMS has served me ONE function only - to search for music I like and to preview 30 second clips for me to decide whether or not I want to buy the CD at BestBuy for $12.99.
I admit, I am a diehard Macintosh, pro-PowerPC/anti-Intel archtecture zealot who downloads the FREE iTunes Music Store download of the week, but I will NEVER EVER purchase music online. First, with DRM, you never really own the music, wipe the license from your hard drive and you'll see what I mean - you can't play your music any/everywhere you want. Second, the quality of Apple's online downloads is pretty bad, for a audiophile. C'mon, 128-bit ACC/MP4 is what? Like no comparison to AIFF or the '--alt-preset insane' setting in 'iTunes LAME' plug-in, LAME for iTunes. With the '--alt-preset insane' setting in 'iTunes LAME' I can make the best-sounding MP3's available, and for listening through little tiny earbuds on my 4th generation 40 GB iPod, that's good enough. Forget Napster, LimeWire, and other P2P clients, hell, when and if I need to, I'll just loan-out to/borrow from a friend/associate a portable FireWire hard drive for copying an entire MP3 library - non DRM'd music to mine and determine what I want, the rest gets deleted; MB/GB are still expensive you know. Seriously though, iTMS is great for locating music that I want to PURCHASE, and preferentially, I'd like to purchase a CD at low cost from BestBuy or somewhere else which allows me to import into MP3 format in iTunes for portability. DRM is just too messy and inconvenient. The music industry should have had an online index of ALL available music a decade ago when music was being swapped P2P via Napster/LimeWire. Now the RIAA is at the mercy of Apple (at least it's NOT Micro$soft and the rest of the remaining BORG collective).
And, like a recent article I read on Slashdot, I do try to purchase and support the ARTISTS (not the RIAA) for the music written and appreciated.