Not to beat a dead horse, but just wanted to add that you are kidding yourself if you think that this is about Apple being a bunch of evil, anti-consumer bastards and Real carrying the torch of freedom trying to free us from the tyranny of DRM here.
Real wasn't concerned with our best interests or wishes here -- they were concerned with being able to sell songs to a larger audience, making more money and doing it as cheaply as possible (through reverse engineering). There is nothing worth applauding here folks in terms of companies caring about end-users and freedom.
Get over it.
exactly -- this is the point a lot of people are missing but you hit upon (intentionaly I hope).
Until Real coughs up for the right (yes, this isn't something that one corportation "owes" another) to sell their songs to the lucrative iPod owning audience, Apple has a justifiable case. Real's decision to not go through the licensing process is as much at fault as Apple's foot-stomping in end-users not being able to play Real songs on their iPods. Now, if they offer (and it sounds like they did once before) and Apple rejects it, I think end users are justified in yelling "hey, we wanted to be able to play files from Real's store too." Apple can listen to those complaints or ignore them. We can keep buying iPods or not. That's business.
Just my take on the main themes of the "Apple is wrong" posts...
-- "It's competition, man" There is nothing admirable about this kind of competition. Real has not improved the quality of any of their products, but is trying to profit from the successes of another. True competition would be producing something better than Apple that lured away iPod users on its own merits. If everyone "competed" in this way, the technological innovation we love so much would go nowhere.
-- "What about the consumer's rights? I can do whatever I want with the hardware I purchased, man!" Indeed you can. Fly your iPod on a model-plain, feed it to your pet ferret, paint it green. Apple doesn't care. Better yet, write a program yourself (if you can) that allows you to play other file formats on your iPod and use it "personally" (don't give it away). Apple wouldn't care. Your personal rights are not being compromised here, people (other than your right to be lazy). What you are all missing is that this isn't Apple vs the little consumer, but a Corporation vs another Corporation. If the Real engineers had written the program and used it personally at home for themselves, Apple would not have had anything to say. Real is attempting to profit financially from this however. Apple's beef with Real doesn't equal a beef with consumers and their rights. If you are too lazy/unmotivated to hack the iPod yourself, you can't honestly complain that Apple is unfair in not wanting you to use what Real has made instead (and let them make money from it as well).
- "Apple owes it to its customers to free us from the shackles of DRM, man"
The level of understanding of business-practices, and the coporate world in general, held by most slashdotters is woefully low. Apple is a business. Theoretically, it doesn't inherently "owe" consumers anything, nor do we "owe" them our money. If they want to be successful however, it behooves them to make a product that satisfies customers' demands and needs. Buy all standards and measures they have done this with the iPod. And the money and time spent on making the iPod the success that it is, are probably beyond most of our appreciations. They are constantly upgrading the iPod/iTunes combo, and more supported file formats are probably not far away. But when they arrive, it won't be because we were "owed" anything. It will be because they will be able to attract more customers with such enhancements, and the effort to implement them is deemed worthwhile to them in a business sense. Asking them to "get over" the Real reverse-engineering displays nothing but an almost complete lack of understanding of how the business world works.
Take responsibility for the purchases you make, people. You knew what you were getting when you laid down money for an iPod, and you decided given its features that it was worth it. It's one thing to say "I wish Apple had cooperated in licensing with Real in the first place," or "I think Real's software/music catalog is better." But to whine because a freebie, and one that you had never given two thoughts about before, is now not going to be allowed is childish. Saying its anti-consumer is an easy excuse for your own laziness. Nothing about this prevents you from doing what you want to your hardware.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to beat a dead horse, but just wanted to add that you are kidding yourself if you think that this is about Apple being a bunch of evil, anti-consumer bastards and Real carrying the torch of freedom trying to free us from the tyranny of DRM here. Real wasn't concerned with our best interests or wishes here -- they were concerned with being able to sell songs to a larger audience, making more money and doing it as cheaply as possible (through reverse engineering). There is nothing worth applauding here folks in terms of companies caring about end-users and freedom. Get over it.
"Real buys a license, case closed."
exactly -- this is the point a lot of people are missing but you hit upon (intentionaly I hope).
Until Real coughs up for the right (yes, this isn't something that one corportation "owes" another) to sell their songs to the lucrative iPod owning audience, Apple has a justifiable case. Real's decision to not go through the licensing process is as much at fault as Apple's foot-stomping in end-users not being able to play Real songs on their iPods. Now, if they offer (and it sounds like they did once before) and Apple rejects it, I think end users are justified in yelling "hey, we wanted to be able to play files from Real's store too." Apple can listen to those complaints or ignore them. We can keep buying iPods or not. That's business.
Just my take on the main themes of the "Apple is wrong" posts...
-- "It's competition, man"
There is nothing admirable about this kind of competition. Real has not improved the quality of any of their products, but is trying to profit from the successes of another. True competition would be producing something better than Apple that lured away iPod users on its own merits. If everyone "competed" in this way, the technological innovation we love so much would go nowhere.
-- "What about the consumer's rights? I can do whatever I want with the hardware I purchased, man!"
Indeed you can. Fly your iPod on a model-plain, feed it to your pet ferret, paint it green. Apple doesn't care. Better yet, write a program yourself (if you can) that allows you to play other file formats on your iPod and use it "personally" (don't give it away). Apple wouldn't care. Your personal rights are not being compromised here, people (other than your right to be lazy). What you are all missing is that this isn't Apple vs the little consumer, but a Corporation vs another Corporation. If the Real engineers had written the program and used it personally at home for themselves, Apple would not have had anything to say. Real is attempting to profit financially from this however. Apple's beef with Real doesn't equal a beef with consumers and their rights. If you are too lazy/unmotivated to hack the iPod yourself, you can't honestly complain that Apple is unfair in not wanting you to use what Real has made instead (and let them make money from it as well).
- "Apple owes it to its customers to free us from the shackles of DRM, man"
The level of understanding of business-practices, and the coporate world in general, held by most slashdotters is woefully low. Apple is a business. Theoretically, it doesn't inherently "owe" consumers anything, nor do we "owe" them our money. If they want to be successful however, it behooves them to make a product that satisfies customers' demands and needs. Buy all standards and measures they have done this with the iPod. And the money and time spent on making the iPod the success that it is, are probably beyond most of our appreciations. They are constantly upgrading the iPod/iTunes combo, and more supported file formats are probably not far away. But when they arrive, it won't be because we were "owed" anything. It will be because they will be able to attract more customers with such enhancements, and the effort to implement them is deemed worthwhile to them in a business sense. Asking them to "get over" the Real reverse-engineering displays nothing but an almost complete lack of understanding of how the business world works.
Take responsibility for the purchases you make, people. You knew what you were getting when you laid down money for an iPod, and you decided given its features that it was worth it. It's one thing to say "I wish Apple had cooperated in licensing with Real in the first place," or "I think Real's software/music catalog is better." But to whine because a freebie, and one that you had never given two thoughts about before, is now not going to be allowed is childish. Saying its anti-consumer is an easy excuse for your own laziness. Nothing about this prevents you from doing what you want to your hardware.