Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

iPods and Such

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I'd happily buy a non-ipod player again if there was one that wasn't a pile of **** and came with good software.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Drogue

      That's not what we're saying. We're saying any music format should be open as an option to developers to be able to make MP3 players that play it. So Creative, say, wouldn't *have* to play AAC format, but they would be able to make a player that did play it. Apple would lose their ability to make it that no-one else could make a player that plays it. They're using their dominance in iTunes, a loss leading project I might add (which is also illegal anticompetitive behaviour), in order to help it dominate the MP3 player market.

      I just wanted to point out that Tingkai is who you should have been quoting, not I.

      Anyway, this is exactly what the Zune is doing with their Marketplace or whatever it is called. It is what MS is doing with their Xbox Live - I can download movies, but they will only work on my Xbox 360.


      Besides which, how many online music stores even support the Mac OS?

      Zune Marketplace requires Windows, and won't play purchased songs from other stores - even ones that Microsoft worked with before (PlaysForSure or whatever)

      Walmart Music tells me my OS is incompatible.

      Napster is also incompatible.

      MusicMatch, same.

      Creative players doesn't show support for OS X, although third-party freeware apps seem to get around this.

      The day Apple works with these sum*****es...

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Tingkai
        Yeah, I hate the fact that McDonalds won't sell Burger King food. They don't do that because they have a monopoly on the food they serve in their restaurants!

        The idea that any digital music player must be able to play every single music format is ridiculous. You might as well complain that the music players don't play cassette tapes.
        You are an idiot. I don't give a damn what the iPod plays or iTunes sells. What is important is that Apple has a product - the Fairplay DRM algorithm - that they refuse to license to anyone else because by doing so they lock in their own customers. If they licensed it - that is, if they let other people pay Apple for the right to use the encryption scheme too - then other people would be able to sell music that runs on iPods, with no effort from Apple. And other people would be able to make mp3 players that play music bought from iTunes.

        If the iPod and iTunes were owned by different companies (and therefore were each designed to be the best quality, rather than to lock people in to each), then iTunes would LOVE to let other players use its music, as that would increase sales. And the iPod company would probably either implement PlaysForSure (which the majority of other music stores use, IIRC) or sell the other stores the ability to sell music for the iPod (since more choice in stores increases the value of the iPod).

        Comment


        • Originally posted by JimmyCracksCorn
          With other players you are locked in

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Verto
            Anyway, this is exactly what the Zune is doing with their Marketplace or whatever it is called. It is what MS is doing with their Xbox Live - I can download movies, but they will only work on my Xbox 360.
            MS doesn't have a monopoly to leverage in this case.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Kuciwalker


              MS doesn't have a monopoly to leverage in this case.
              Neither does Apple, given the number of choices there are.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Verto
                Neither does Apple, given the number of choices there are.
                Standard Oil had a monopoly even when they weren't the only supplier. Microsoft has a monopoly despite Mac and Linux. The iPod has a monopoly despite a dozen competitors with a tiny fraction of the marketshare.

                Your argument would not hold up in court, and that's the only metric that matters.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Kuciwalker


                  Standard Oil had a monopoly even when they weren't the only supplier. Microsoft has a monopoly despite Mac and Linux. The iPod has a monopoly despite a dozen competitors with a tiny fraction of the marketshare.

                  Your argument would not hold up in court, and that's the only metric that matters.
                  Rather to be right in reality, than right in court, since I'm not the one being sued

                  Comment


                  • The court is the reality. Monopoly is a term defined by statute. You can go masturbate in la la land if you want though.

                    edit: hmm, maybe it's not explicity defined by statute, just by the courts...

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X