I find the most interesting part of all of it to be that Apple didn't choose to maintain their "intellectual property rights" over them for utilizing their resources to develop the software. I suppose they didn't really have any right to the product, seeing as how they axed it and all, but it seems like they could've just taken the project as their own since it was all their own resources, hardware, power, employee time, space, etc. that really went into the developement of it. I assume that this was all done after hours and didn't really impact the productivity of the staff that were involved too, but still...
Seems like very benevolent behavior for a corporation.
Well, EMI is a recording label. BMG, however, is not a recording label. They are a redistributer. There don't seem to be any other labels that are in agreement and I would question the validity of the one person at EMI that made that part of a statement that was quoted in the press release from Real. The perspective shown there obviously aren't an industry-wide held belief. The only reason that Real wants to make Harmony the defacto standard is to get their DRM in as many devices as possible.
The contracts that Apple negotiated with the labels, which opened up the market to all the other copycats that are out there today, do depend upon the maintainability of the DRM attached to the files sold. The way that Real has "hacked" the iPod software in order to allow Harmony to mimic the Apple DRM is a threat to the security of the DRM. Your interpretation of the ramifications of what Real has done is myopic.
The letter that Glaser "sent to Jobs" was another media stunt that came after the corporate negotiations failed when Apple denied them the rights to use or have access to any of their software or hardware. The idea of licensing the Apple DRM doesn't make any sense when Real wants to distribute their own DRM, which is the only logical long term goal of distributing music electronically if you aren't producing it yourself. The letter was released to the press by Real, supposedly at the same time that he sent it to Jobs. That's not the way business is done, unless you want to sway the rabid masses. Funniest thing about it is that they got so many to believe it.
HP has a contract with Apple that covers the hardware and the software, so it does include the DRM. Motorola and Apple just announced that they are going to release a device that sounds like it will extend the iPod to work as a phone too. As for the Motorola phone that plays Fairplay DRM'd files is due out in '05. That too includes the licensing of the DRM. Regardless of what you think.
Real isn't interested in making any hardware devices, that's why they need to leech onto whatever device they can to try and justify to people why they should buy their music files and their DRM.
You and I have no clue as to what kind of a deal Real offered to Apple when they supposedly asked to license Fairplay. It doesn't really matter what it was, Apple decided it wasn't in their best interests or the best interests of their customers. This isn't in any way "...at the expense of Apple DRM users." as you want to believe. This solidifies their ability to provide high quality products.
Real is in a bind. They don't have the position to save their failing business. So, they use questionable, which are still to be determined as to whether they are legal, methods to piggyback on the success of others when they were told that they couldn't.
Your interpretation is naive. Real wouldn't be losing money to sell music with their DRM if they weren't interested in getting their DRM out there to try and maintain a hold on the market that they're losing due to horrible business practices in the past. They screwed over their users over and over again by making inroads for spyware and charging for bad, incomplete and buggy software. Their losing their grip as others flock to the other formats. They weren't interested in doing music distribution until everybody else started doing music distribution and they saw the writing on the wall. The DRM. Their ego is deflating and they are desperate to try whatever they can to maintain their company. You and a few others have bought into it and they now have a tiny foothold with their DRM. To think that they are interested in selling music, which has been shown repeatedly to be a money losing option, is to be ignorant of reality and the direction that the industry is headed. They want to get their DRM into as many devices as possible so that people like yourself will need to rely on them staying in business to maintain the Harmony software and their DRM so that you
I don't see the need for this. It is the responsibility of the parents to monitor their children and accept responsibility for them.
That being said, nobody said that they want to ban games. Governor Rod Blagojevich has suggested that he intends to fine retailers that don't enforce the video game rating systems by selling overtly violent and sexually explicit games to minors. He's related this to selling alcohol to minors. Movie theaters are held responsible if they allow minors into R and X rated films, so why not hold the retailers responsible for selling mature/adult rated games to minors?
Granted half off is great. But that pricing has been scaled back to only count for "new releases" on the Real site now. You can only sell so much at a loss for so long before you put yourself out of business. BuyMusic.com is a prime example that the whole "pricing is everything driving the market" concept is false too.
Lowest price is Real, on a handful of tracks. Greatest selection is Apple. Greatest portability, depends on what you choose for your portable device. My preference goes more in this order: Quality, non-MS proprietary products, selection and then price. I don't see myself as an "Apple zealot", but I am very anti-MS in most of my views.
You are right that it is Real's choice to break other licensing models to make their files compatible on as many devices as they like. It's also Apple's prerogative to break this functionality as they choose. Apple didn't hide the fact that they would do just that. A day after Real had their press conference to announce their intentions, Apple said that the next revision of their software would break Rhapsody, and that is what they did.
I find it most amazing that nobody seemed to mention, or care, that this happened for nearly a month. The update was made available November 18. Funny that now it's news. Just goes to show how few people appear to be using the Real service to begin with.
Please don't take the drone comment to heart. I just have an issue with people calling anybody that defends Apple's right to do business the way that they choose as a zealot. Which is how I took your previous comments.
Real doesn't use original master recordings so the extra 64 kbps is insignificant, virtually meaningless. But why would I expect some drone to comprehend this? I don't, because I don't believe that you're capable of it. What choice are they offering? Use their DRM instead of Apple's. Woo boy, that really opened up the variety that we didn't have available to us before. Thanks for the choice to use your DRM Glaser.
If you had bothered to read my post rather than just being a closed minded reactionary stereotyper, you might be able to understand that the Real DRM is a threat to Apple's business model in more than one way. It's a threat to Apple's ability to maintain their contracts with the recording labels due to their perceived inability to maintain their DRM which would lead to the end of the iTMS. It's also a threat to the true purpose of all of these online music stores, the proliferation of the DRM itself.
Apple made the business decision to deny Real to have access to their media playing device. That's their decision, not yours and not Reals. So, Real, decides to start a false media advertising attack against the one device that supports more formats than any other on the market today by claiming that they are a closed device.
You can't even do your own math. I didn't list seven, I listed eight, you counted seven. I didn't include VBR in that number, that's why I listed the "(8)" and I left out VBR AAC alltogether. The number seven comes from your statements, from your post: "PCM in two", "two open formats", "one proprietary", "two encrypted". 2+2+1+2=7.
If you want to attempt to explain your inability to see your own numbers and play by the rules you laid out, then we can do it this way: WAV, AIFF, MP3, VBR MP3, AAC, VBR AAC, Apple Lossless, Audible and to figure in against your inclusion of the DRM'd WM files, we also have AAC-DRM (iTMS). So, by your logic the iPod handles 9 formats. Still more on the iPod than the Rio.
Just deal with it, the Rio isn't as open as the iPod, no matter what you think or how you want to attempt to manipulate the numbers to suit your needs. If you want to play games with the numbers, then you have to do it for both sides in order to be fair.
If you really want to get technical, the iPod also supports another form of DRM through the Audible format. I didn't count it twice as I don't believe that you can get Audible files that aren't DRM'd.
I use it on a regular basis for both CD and DVD encoding. All of the iApps are free too and are very good for free software. I haven't used lame. I agree that AAC is superior to MP3.
I haven't seen any labels praising Real's behavior, you'll have to provide support for that claim. As for contracts, you're simply wrong. If Apple allows others to mess with their model, then the labels will lose confidence in their ability to protect their media and they won't renew, it's that simple. Real's contracts are irrelevant, as this is about Apple stopping Real from screwing with their device.
As for the lists, Apple has 7 (8) and the Rio offers 6. So, the list is longer for Apple. As I stated before, they have the most support for any device out there. I don't see what your point was there.
The problem from Real's perspective is that they couldn't negotiate a deal to get their own DRM onto the iPod. Your interpretation is what Glaser wants you to believe, as it isn't really true. Apple does allow others to use their DRM. They've worked out contracts with HP and Motorola already. HP has the HP branded iPod deal which allows them to use Apple's DRM and Motorola has the cell phone deal that allows them to playback Apple DRM'd files through their cell phones.
The future is all about DRM and whose is going to be used the most. What kind of business decision is it to let other DRMs be used on their devices? Bad.
Glaser went into negotiations with Apple and was turned away since he can't offer anything Real (pardon the pun). Glaser wants the Real DRM to be used somewhere, anywhere. This is why Real is failing. They have nothing to offer in the way of competition, so they attack the big DRM company, Apple. Then they start a media circus and lie to the public about what they are doing and the public takes the bait.
That is completely correct. What other device supports all the formats that the iPod does and the other two as well? None. Now, get a clue and don't be a coward.
It's not about the unit sales, it never has been. It is all about the DRM.
All that Real has done, is get the iPod to play their DRM'd version of AAC files. This does nothing to help Apple get their DRM to be the prevalent one.
So, how much of a difference did you see between a 128 kbps AAC and a 192 kbps AAC file? Is it all that distinguishable? Those are the files used by Apple and Real respectively.
Also, did you do any of your testing with original master recording rips vs. CD rips? That's the other difference between Apple and Real.
Nobody has mentioned that Real gets their files from CD and Apple gets theirs from the original master recordings either. So, you are correct, they are not selling the same product. Real's product isn't necessarily better, as you seem to be implying it is. It's another Glaser trick, he's a lot like PT Barnum or the Wizard of Oz. Great show and smoke, but no Real substance (pardon the pun). The OMRs are superior to the CDs initially and the extra 64 kbps doesn't make enough of a difference, unfortunately.
If Apple allows this questionable scheme, it is a scheme, to continue then they will lose their licensing agreement with the labels which allows them to run the iTunes Music Store. Then no more iTMS and Rob Glaser is selling you your music which he will raise the price of, he already has since his little media stunt.
The iPod is the single most open digital music device on the market today. It supports the playback of more audio formats than any other device like it. It supports AAC, MP3, Apple Lossless, AIFF, MP3 VBR, WAV and Audible. It also supports the DRM from the iTMS.
It does not support any other form of DRM, which is really what has Rob Glaser's panties in a bunch, as it won't support the Real DRM. So, he tries to convince everybody that his little stunt will "open up the iPod" when all it did was allow his DRM to be supported. He didn't introduce OGG, there's no WMA on there. It's a smoke screen that he's created to get everybody back onto his failing format. The only thing that Real has done is create a bunch of hoopla for every Apple hater out there to jump onto the bandwagon. He's opened up the iPod to his proprietary DRM and nothing else. Real fooled a lot of people into believing their hype in order to keep their company alive. They sell their AAC encoded, Real DRM'd files at a loss and get a bunch of naive people into their camp.
Now when Apple comes back and stops their product from breaking their licensing agreements that they set up with the labels, as they said they would, those naive people that thought they were getting a great deal are going to cry foul.
Let's not forget Nintendo vs. NEC (TG16). The handheld, TurboExpress, that played the console titles. Whatever happened to them anyhow? Let's not forget the great title and mascot, "Bonk".
If it were fascist, wouldn't there have to be some non-benevolent treatment of the Oompa Loompas or something. I don't recall anything like what you are describing.
I can see some ageism going on, which would probably be better described as anti-adult, but not anti-woman sentiments. He did also write Matilda too which is anything but anti-woman.
If there is anything in his writings, it seems that there is a strong anti-adult/authority/repressive society sentiment. Which is quite contrary to fascism.
There is no apparent dictatorship going on within the confines of the chocolate factory. The Oompa Loompas seem to be doing what they are doing of their own free will without any repressive authority. Actually, the outside world is presented as the authoritarian society and the inside of the factory is a near utopia. There is no terror, no nationalism, no racism and no censorship. There is a protection of secrets, but that's hardly censorship.
You haven't provided any hard examples of anything that you've said. You've presented vague and ambiguous generalities that don't demonstrate your proposition. Your reference to an "Ubermensch" is way off the mark, Charlie has no special abilities or powers. The trials that Wonka puts him through showed that Charlie was a good, kind, honest, trustworthy and benevolent individual that cared more about the well-being of others than his own advancement. That's hardly what you describe.
Sorry, I don't see any of what you have described. He was a master of presenting "black comedy".
Slashdot Mirror
It's very amusing.
I find the most interesting part of all of it to be that Apple didn't choose to maintain their "intellectual property rights" over them for utilizing their resources to develop the software. I suppose they didn't really have any right to the product, seeing as how they axed it and all, but it seems like they could've just taken the project as their own since it was all their own resources, hardware, power, employee time, space, etc. that really went into the developement of it. I assume that this was all done after hours and didn't really impact the productivity of the staff that were involved too, but still...
Seems like very benevolent behavior for a corporation.
He got used right into a contract deal with Apple and his own company. I wish I could get used like that.
This isn't some OpenSource GPL thing, this is a real company now with a real product. I didn't see anywhere where the story said this was free.
Steve Jobs is quite a bit like Ron Avitzur. You don't really seem to understand that little fact.
Good thing that he has his own company and doesn't need to rely on people like you to hire him then isn't it?
Wow, I am impressed. This is a very inspiring story. Good luck to Ron Avitzur and PacificTech.
Keeping the dream alive.
No, you are not zeet.
I apologize for the mistake I made in not checking the user names when I responded to zeet as if that were you.
Well, EMI is a recording label. BMG, however, is not a recording label. They are a redistributer. There don't seem to be any other labels that are in agreement and I would question the validity of the one person at EMI that made that part of a statement that was quoted in the press release from Real. The perspective shown there obviously aren't an industry-wide held belief. The only reason that Real wants to make Harmony the defacto standard is to get their DRM in as many devices as possible.
The contracts that Apple negotiated with the labels, which opened up the market to all the other copycats that are out there today, do depend upon the maintainability of the DRM attached to the files sold. The way that Real has "hacked" the iPod software in order to allow Harmony to mimic the Apple DRM is a threat to the security of the DRM. Your interpretation of the ramifications of what Real has done is myopic.
The letter that Glaser "sent to Jobs" was another media stunt that came after the corporate negotiations failed when Apple denied them the rights to use or have access to any of their software or hardware. The idea of licensing the Apple DRM doesn't make any sense when Real wants to distribute their own DRM, which is the only logical long term goal of distributing music electronically if you aren't producing it yourself. The letter was released to the press by Real, supposedly at the same time that he sent it to Jobs. That's not the way business is done, unless you want to sway the rabid masses. Funniest thing about it is that they got so many to believe it.
HP has a contract with Apple that covers the hardware and the software, so it does include the DRM. Motorola and Apple just announced that they are going to release a device that sounds like it will extend the iPod to work as a phone too. As for the Motorola phone that plays Fairplay DRM'd files is due out in '05. That too includes the licensing of the DRM. Regardless of what you think.
Real isn't interested in making any hardware devices, that's why they need to leech onto whatever device they can to try and justify to people why they should buy their music files and their DRM.
You and I have no clue as to what kind of a deal Real offered to Apple when they supposedly asked to license Fairplay. It doesn't really matter what it was, Apple decided it wasn't in their best interests or the best interests of their customers. This isn't in any way "...at the expense of Apple DRM users." as you want to believe. This solidifies their ability to provide high quality products.
Real is in a bind. They don't have the position to save their failing business. So, they use questionable, which are still to be determined as to whether they are legal, methods to piggyback on the success of others when they were told that they couldn't.
Your interpretation is naive. Real wouldn't be losing money to sell music with their DRM if they weren't interested in getting their DRM out there to try and maintain a hold on the market that they're losing due to horrible business practices in the past. They screwed over their users over and over again by making inroads for spyware and charging for bad, incomplete and buggy software. Their losing their grip as others flock to the other formats. They weren't interested in doing music distribution until everybody else started doing music distribution and they saw the writing on the wall. The DRM. Their ego is deflating and they are desperate to try whatever they can to maintain their company. You and a few others have bought into it and they now have a tiny foothold with their DRM. To think that they are interested in selling music, which has been shown repeatedly to be a money losing option, is to be ignorant of reality and the direction that the industry is headed. They want to get their DRM into as many devices as possible so that people like yourself will need to rely on them staying in business to maintain the Harmony software and their DRM so that you
I don't see the need for this. It is the responsibility of the parents to monitor their children and accept responsibility for them.
That being said, nobody said that they want to ban games. Governor Rod Blagojevich has suggested that he intends to fine retailers that don't enforce the video game rating systems by selling overtly violent and sexually explicit games to minors. He's related this to selling alcohol to minors. Movie theaters are held responsible if they allow minors into R and X rated films, so why not hold the retailers responsible for selling mature/adult rated games to minors?
Granted half off is great. But that pricing has been scaled back to only count for "new releases" on the Real site now. You can only sell so much at a loss for so long before you put yourself out of business. BuyMusic.com is a prime example that the whole "pricing is everything driving the market" concept is false too.
Lowest price is Real, on a handful of tracks. Greatest selection is Apple. Greatest portability, depends on what you choose for your portable device. My preference goes more in this order: Quality, non-MS proprietary products, selection and then price. I don't see myself as an "Apple zealot", but I am very anti-MS in most of my views.
You are right that it is Real's choice to break other licensing models to make their files compatible on as many devices as they like. It's also Apple's prerogative to break this functionality as they choose. Apple didn't hide the fact that they would do just that. A day after Real had their press conference to announce their intentions, Apple said that the next revision of their software would break Rhapsody, and that is what they did.
I find it most amazing that nobody seemed to mention, or care, that this happened for nearly a month. The update was made available November 18. Funny that now it's news. Just goes to show how few people appear to be using the Real service to begin with.
It's also rather interesting to see that this hasn't had much of an affect on Apple either. They just announced their 200 millionth downloaded track. No other seller seems close to this kind of volume yet.
Please don't take the drone comment to heart. I just have an issue with people calling anybody that defends Apple's right to do business the way that they choose as a zealot. Which is how I took your previous comments.
Real doesn't use original master recordings so the extra 64 kbps is insignificant, virtually meaningless. But why would I expect some drone to comprehend this? I don't, because I don't believe that you're capable of it. What choice are they offering? Use their DRM instead of Apple's. Woo boy, that really opened up the variety that we didn't have available to us before. Thanks for the choice to use your DRM Glaser.
If you had bothered to read my post rather than just being a closed minded reactionary stereotyper, you might be able to understand that the Real DRM is a threat to Apple's business model in more than one way. It's a threat to Apple's ability to maintain their contracts with the recording labels due to their perceived inability to maintain their DRM which would lead to the end of the iTMS. It's also a threat to the true purpose of all of these online music stores, the proliferation of the DRM itself.
Apple made the business decision to deny Real to have access to their media playing device. That's their decision, not yours and not Reals. So, Real, decides to start a false media advertising attack against the one device that supports more formats than any other on the market today by claiming that they are a closed device.
You can't even do your own math. I didn't list seven, I listed eight, you counted seven. I didn't include VBR in that number, that's why I listed the "(8)" and I left out VBR AAC alltogether. The number seven comes from your statements, from your post: "PCM in two", "two open formats", "one proprietary", "two encrypted". 2+2+1+2=7.
If you want to attempt to explain your inability to see your own numbers and play by the rules you laid out, then we can do it this way: WAV, AIFF, MP3, VBR MP3, AAC, VBR AAC, Apple Lossless, Audible and to figure in against your inclusion of the DRM'd WM files, we also have AAC-DRM (iTMS). So, by your logic the iPod handles 9 formats. Still more on the iPod than the Rio.
Just deal with it, the Rio isn't as open as the iPod, no matter what you think or how you want to attempt to manipulate the numbers to suit your needs. If you want to play games with the numbers, then you have to do it for both sides in order to be fair.
If you really want to get technical, the iPod also supports another form of DRM through the Audible format. I didn't count it twice as I don't believe that you can get Audible files that aren't DRM'd.
I use it on a regular basis for both CD and DVD encoding. All of the iApps are free too and are very good for free software. I haven't used lame. I agree that AAC is superior to MP3.
I haven't seen any labels praising Real's behavior, you'll have to provide support for that claim. As for contracts, you're simply wrong. If Apple allows others to mess with their model, then the labels will lose confidence in their ability to protect their media and they won't renew, it's that simple. Real's contracts are irrelevant, as this is about Apple stopping Real from screwing with their device.
As for the lists, Apple has 7 (8) and the Rio offers 6. So, the list is longer for Apple. As I stated before, they have the most support for any device out there. I don't see what your point was there.
The problem from Real's perspective is that they couldn't negotiate a deal to get their own DRM onto the iPod. Your interpretation is what Glaser wants you to believe, as it isn't really true. Apple does allow others to use their DRM. They've worked out contracts with HP and Motorola already. HP has the HP branded iPod deal which allows them to use Apple's DRM and Motorola has the cell phone deal that allows them to playback Apple DRM'd files through their cell phones.
The future is all about DRM and whose is going to be used the most. What kind of business decision is it to let other DRMs be used on their devices? Bad.
Glaser went into negotiations with Apple and was turned away since he can't offer anything Real (pardon the pun). Glaser wants the Real DRM to be used somewhere, anywhere. This is why Real is failing. They have nothing to offer in the way of competition, so they attack the big DRM company, Apple. Then they start a media circus and lie to the public about what they are doing and the public takes the bait.
That is completely correct. What other device supports all the formats that the iPod does and the other two as well? None. Now, get a clue and don't be a coward.
It's not about the unit sales, it never has been. It is all about the DRM.
All that Real has done, is get the iPod to play their DRM'd version of AAC files. This does nothing to help Apple get their DRM to be the prevalent one.
So, how much of a difference did you see between a 128 kbps AAC and a 192 kbps AAC file? Is it all that distinguishable? Those are the files used by Apple and Real respectively.
Also, did you do any of your testing with original master recording rips vs. CD rips? That's the other difference between Apple and Real.
Nobody has mentioned that Real gets their files from CD and Apple gets theirs from the original master recordings either. So, you are correct, they are not selling the same product. Real's product isn't necessarily better, as you seem to be implying it is. It's another Glaser trick, he's a lot like PT Barnum or the Wizard of Oz. Great show and smoke, but no Real substance (pardon the pun). The OMRs are superior to the CDs initially and the extra 64 kbps doesn't make enough of a difference, unfortunately.
If Apple allows this questionable scheme, it is a scheme, to continue then they will lose their licensing agreement with the labels which allows them to run the iTunes Music Store. Then no more iTMS and Rob Glaser is selling you your music which he will raise the price of, he already has since his little media stunt.
The iPod is the single most open digital music device on the market today. It supports the playback of more audio formats than any other device like it. It supports AAC, MP3, Apple Lossless, AIFF, MP3 VBR, WAV and Audible. It also supports the DRM from the iTMS.
It does not support any other form of DRM, which is really what has Rob Glaser's panties in a bunch, as it won't support the Real DRM. So, he tries to convince everybody that his little stunt will "open up the iPod" when all it did was allow his DRM to be supported. He didn't introduce OGG, there's no WMA on there. It's a smoke screen that he's created to get everybody back onto his failing format. The only thing that Real has done is create a bunch of hoopla for every Apple hater out there to jump onto the bandwagon. He's opened up the iPod to his proprietary DRM and nothing else. Real fooled a lot of people into believing their hype in order to keep their company alive. They sell their AAC encoded, Real DRM'd files at a loss and get a bunch of naive people into their camp.
Now when Apple comes back and stops their product from breaking their licensing agreements that they set up with the labels, as they said they would, those naive people that thought they were getting a great deal are going to cry foul.
Let's not forget Nintendo vs. NEC (TG16). The handheld, TurboExpress, that played the console titles. Whatever happened to them anyhow? Let's not forget the great title and mascot, "Bonk".
If it were fascist, wouldn't there have to be some non-benevolent treatment of the Oompa Loompas or something. I don't recall anything like what you are describing.
I can see some ageism going on, which would probably be better described as anti-adult, but not anti-woman sentiments. He did also write Matilda too which is anything but anti-woman.
If there is anything in his writings, it seems that there is a strong anti-adult/authority/repressive society sentiment. Which is quite contrary to fascism.
There is no apparent dictatorship going on within the confines of the chocolate factory. The Oompa Loompas seem to be doing what they are doing of their own free will without any repressive authority. Actually, the outside world is presented as the authoritarian society and the inside of the factory is a near utopia. There is no terror, no nationalism, no racism and no censorship. There is a protection of secrets, but that's hardly censorship.
You haven't provided any hard examples of anything that you've said. You've presented vague and ambiguous generalities that don't demonstrate your proposition. Your reference to an "Ubermensch" is way off the mark, Charlie has no special abilities or powers. The trials that Wonka puts him through showed that Charlie was a good, kind, honest, trustworthy and benevolent individual that cared more about the well-being of others than his own advancement. That's hardly what you describe.
Sorry, I don't see any of what you have described. He was a master of presenting "black comedy".
Would you point out some examples of the fascist subtexts, please?
Just enter the code 1138...
It's just that easy.
This company is offering nothing other than a way to have extra software installed on your system.
I find it very interesting that MS and Sony will be using IBM processors in their next-gen gaming systems.
Absolutely. The initial source quality will affect the final encoded version.