October 21, 2003
Ars Technica on Windows iTunes, and Even More on iTunes DRM
Update: Follow the discussion in the comments section – good points, and some clarification from me.
Read the editorial here. Then, check out Apple’s MPEG-4 page to see what a contradiction the AAC/Fairplay combo is. Key quote: “No longer will content providers need to encode, host, and store media in multiple formats. Instead, a single format can reach a broad audience equipped with playback devices from not one, but a multitude of companies across a wide array of platforms.”
Where’s the multitude of devices for iTunes songs? What’s the good of an open standard if everyone creates their own proprietary substandard?
In a sense, are the players – Apple, Microsoft together with the other music stores – acting like we’re at the “early adopter” phase? They’re laying the foundations by trying to win a standards battle. Apple is trying to win through restrictions and tie-ins to the iPod; the iPod is not affordable for most people, but that usually wouldn’t matter to early adopters, because they are generally more wealthy. And so long as the music industry is forcing them to use DRM, Apple might as well take advantage of it.
The thing is, MP3 and P2P have in a sense already pushed us past that early adopter phase. People have already chosen a format. Apple has to not only beat WMA, but also MP3.
So, I think the move is risky if Apple hopes to reach a wide audience. Short-term, it might work. But long term, I’m not so sure if consumers will put up with this format lock-in. Any model that tries to make the digital world look like the analog world in this way is regressive, and, eventually, regressive models should die out in favor of progressive ones.
Perhaps Apple isn’t really seeking a wide-audience. Maybe they just want to get slightly past the 3-4 percent of the computer market they already control. In that case, making people who buy from the iTunes Store also use expensive Apple hardware might be just fine, because all they need to capture are the wealthiest buyers. In that case, iTunes itself is really just a blip on the digital music radar – it won’t be a significant music store.
Filed by Derek Slater at 11:35 am under Big Ideas
6 Comments
Hi, Derek:
The Wired News article (Buck a Song, or a Buccaneer) echoes your conclusions. Worth a look, because it certainly is the case that Apple is definitely targeted at the upmarket, irrespective of Jobs claims otherwise.
Frank
Since Apple is the only manufacturer of Apple hardware I know they are an easy target, but do we really have to hear the tired “expensive hardware” meme again? Compare Apple pricing to Sony and Dell, not Bob’s House of Hardware.
That being said, “Apple has to not only beat WMA, but also MP3.” And Microsoft has the beat AAC and MP3. iPod and iTunes play MP3 files. Sure, Apple doesn’t sell MP3 files, but then with the exception of eMusic (which just changed it’s business model) nobody else does either.
Is Apple using the store as a loss leader for hardware sales? Probably? Are they using the store to pave the way for other digital items? Probably (see Audible books that you can now buy through the store). Is it all DRMed? Yes. Of course, Audible was DRMed before iTunes was even around…
“In that case, iTunes itself is really just a blip on the digital music radar – it won’t be a significant music store.”
Really? Then why are they crushing the other online offerings right now?
Getting your music via KaZaA et al. is getting increasingly risky and I don’t see copyright reform or CP happening anytime soon. At least “copy-protection” for CDs you buy is still a joke…
— Apple Apologist
PS – I don’t dig DRM, but I do buy music using iTunes and I do own two iPods.
Let me respond to each piece in turn:
I’m perfectly comfortable with a cheap MP3/CD player. That fits my budget and, in general, I’d bet most people do not have 300 bucks to drop on an iPod. I don’t care if Apple sells expensive hardware; I just want the option to buy cheaper hardware if I want – otherwise, I have no reason to shop at iTMS.
Certainly. As I’ve said before, I don’t like the lock-in you get from WMA either – WMA at least gives you SOME flexibility with devices and programs, but I still don’t like it. As I suggested in this post, I don’t think DRM can succeed if it doesn’t preserve the sort of (practically) ubiquitous usage and interop that you get today with MP3. Why is it in any consumer’s best interests to put up with the artificial barriers that these proprietary standards are creating?
First, put that quote in context – I said, “Perhaps Apple isn’t really seeking a wide-audience” and then discussed how they might only be trying to appeal to people willing to spend a lot of money and get locked into the iPod. If they aren’t going for a wide audience, then iTunes is NOT a replacement for KaZaA – agreed? (See Frank’s comment above yours)
I suppose I don’t consider the 3-4 percent of Apple computer owners a “blip” in the computer market – so that is too strong. But, you have to admit that if it’s not targeted at a wide audience, it’s not going to be live up to its hype – it won’t be the star of the digital music market . It’ll be a niche product – a significant niche product, like Apple’s share of the computer market, but still a small part of the market.
This is where it gets tricky with the branding and naming. iTunes the program supports more than the iPod. I still hook up a Rio 500 (64mb yeah baby! yeah!) to iTunes. Of course, the Rio hardware will not play songs bought in the iTunes Music Store, with the exception of Audible content.
But let’s say that Apple sold $100 iPods and the iTunes Store sold DRM-free mp3 files (I notice that people don’t complain about the patents that taint mp3 much these days…). Well, one of those things will probably happen, and it’s the $100 iPod. Jobs has already said he wished they could do it. But the cost of the iPod parts is keeping the price up for now. Back to the DRM-free files and why that won’t happen. Who is preventing DRM-free music from being sold through iTunes, BestBuy, et al.?
As for the “niche product,” I can only assume you mean iTunes Music Service. Even so, the numbers, very early numbers, look good for Apple. iPod market share is 31%. Nielsen SoundScan says iTunes marketshare is 70% of all legal downloads last week. (source: ipodlounge.com) Apple definitely seems to be going for a wide audience. Can you replace KaZaA dealing with copyright lawyers? No chance in hell…
iPod “lock in” depends on your content. If you rip your CDs (while you can, keep that shift key down!) you can dump your mp3 onto any player you want. Just because there is no player that supports Apple’s AAC today, doesn’t mean there won’t be one tomorrow. Hell, I’ve heard rumors of iPods floating around Cupertino that play ogg files. Hardware support for a real, open, patent-free format…that would rock.
Sorry for the ramble format…
— Apple Apologist
Dear AA,
It seems the single pressing question is who will cave first. As a proud owner of an iRiver w/256M that does NOT play .AAC, I’m hoping iTunes comes around. I wouldn’t call it a Harry’s Hardware brand; its mobility is vastly superior to an iPOD, it has aa FM tuner, and the price is just right for those of us who can’t afford 2 iPods and a Rio.
Until I find an acceptable AAC to MP3 converter, I’m sticking to iTune alternatives (I say ‘alternatives begrudgingly, since I prefer my current choices). Primarily, I use internet radio (sometimes timeshift w/ StreamRipper ), NPR and indie labels that get it, like GoKart Record’s with their MP300 deal (300 mp3’s for $10).
For AAC to replace MP3, the barriers must drop dramatically (i.e. simplistic conversion of CD to AAC, a multitude of devices that support AAC). For a new technology to replace the former it must be twice as good and half as expensive (to mangle Moore’s law). AAC/iPod, in their current states, are neither.
Adam,
Some notes on my take. All of the heat is on Apple with iTunes/DRM/AAC/MP3. I think the heat should be on the industry dictating terms to Apple. Apple wants to sell music to help sell iPods. They need music. They make a deal to get the music. A deal with the devil? Perhaps.
Who are they making a deal with? The labels. Who is saying you can’t have your mp3? Is it Apple? Probably not. The smaller labels who don’t mind mp3 are stuck with AAC since the big labels dictated the terms. I agree, that sucks.
So when we complain that customers are getting the shaft, lets not forget whose hand is on the handle. I submit that it’s not Apple. When people complain about the small catalog in iTunes, I again submit that the blame doesn’t lay with Apple. Can you tell I’m an Apple apologist yet? 😉
— Apple Apologist