Norway et al. against the iPod/iTunes

[diablojota]

Okay, here's a recent news story on Fox news about Norway and their ambitions to open up iTunes. Same story we've heard about France, etc. They feel that the music sold on iTunes should be allowed to be played on any mp3 player. The argument in Norway is "If Apple can require an iPod for songs via iTunes, then music, book and film companies might restrict their products to specific players too, he said.". This is a load of crap. Why? Because if you don't want to use an iPod or iTunes, you can go to the store, by the stupid CD and rip it into mp3 format to play on any mp3 player. Same with books, movies, etc. It's not like there's no choice. There's plenty of it.
Anyway, this is more of a rant, and not a well formulated one at that. I just am frustrated by this talk of opening up iTunes. Well, I want a Mac that runs Windows, so I think Microsoft should open up windows so we can run it on the Mac G4 and G5 hardware. Or how about this, I want Ferrari to release their manumatic shifter software and transmissions so I can have that installed on my Toyota Camry. I think that should be opened up and available to anyone.
Anyway, the point is, if I don't want to use an iPod, then there are plenty of alternatives, albeit, they won't work with iTunes, but that's the sacrifice I'll have to make. Apple shouldn't be required to make their products work on any other system. That haven't don't it with their OS, why should they do it with their iPod?
Sorry, long rant.

[Tommo]

Has it not occured that there is plenty of choice because other people are not as restricitive as Apple have been. Go back to iTunes 3 and it supported most of the MP3 players on the market. Apple in their usual restrictive way removed all support apart from the iPod.

It is not unreasonable (especially in view of the companies view on piracy) following your arguement that Sony restrict all media from it's DVD and Music arms to only play on Sony equipment.

Why do you find it unreasonable that users of other MP3 players are not able to access music via the iTunes music store ?

[diablojota]

Of course it has occured to me. That's not the issue. The issue is that forcing a company to open up something that pulls in maybe 10 million USD in a country like Norway is ridiculous. Actually, Apple still supports other mp3 players via iTunes on Mac OSX, just not for the iTMS.
Here's the problem with the Sony logic. Sony could very well do what you said. However, they got smacked around for trying that (ATRAC3, I believe was their format). People didn't buy it. Yet 70% of mp3 owners' buy iPods. Dominant form won. If they don't want the iPod, then burn a CD of their bought music from iTunes, convert it to mp3. Problem solved. There are plenty of work arounds to get their iTMS music store music to play on these generic crap mp3 players.
Why am I against it? Because it takes the quality control out of Apple's hands. iTunes and iPods just work together. And if there is a problem, Apple will resolve it. They control the entire process, allowing the simplicity of use and quality to be owned by them alone. If they were to allow 3rd party products to work with iTunes easily, then people might associate any issues that arise, or even just the crappiness of the mp3 player, with Apple instead of pointing fingers at the company who produced the mp3 player.
Apple is trying to develop an excellent brand reputation for itself. It is trying to avoid the wonderful reputation that Windows has. If Apple owns the complete experience, and if most people like that experience, it gives Apple a good name. However if someone is using a creative mp3 player with iTunes, and there is an issue with the player, they may assoicate any non-reparable by apple issues to apple when it's creative's fault thus leading to a bad reputation for apple.
Also, trying to support the multitude of other mp3 products out there would be costly for apple. Why should they have to bear those costs?

Originally Posted by Tommo

Has it not occured that there is plenty of choice because other people are not as restricitive as Apple have been. Go back to iTunes 3 and it supported most of the MP3 players on the market. Apple in their usual restrictive way removed all support apart from the iPod.

It is not unreasonable (especially in view of the companies view on piracy) following your arguement that Sony restrict all media from it's DVD and Music arms to only play on Sony equipment.

Why do you find it unreasonable that users of other MP3 players are not able to access music via the iTunes music store ?

[Tommo]

While I agree with most of what you say, the bottom line with the iTunes music store rather than the iTunes software is to my mind, at least they are selling music and you should be able to play that music, that you have legally purchased how you want to not how you are told to by the company you purchased it from.

I don't know about under US law, but here in the UK it is technically illegal to rip a CD that you have purchased and I believe it is the same in a lot of Europe. My argument is not that they should open up iTunes to connect to a multitude of players, but that maybe they should help other manufacturers develop their software to allow it to legally use music purchased from the iTunes store. Surely that would generate more revenue for them in the long term.

[jh2112]

This is more for consumer choice and freedom to buy in the future. A preventative measure.

Imagine... 10 years go by...cds are withdrawn...online purchasing is the only way to buy music...no problem, there's plenty of choice....

20 years go by... online music price cutting has bankrupted the smaller stores...iTMS finishes off the remaining, competing online music stores, thanks to the fat pile of cash that Apple made from the ipod... The only way to buy music is from iTMS.
Now you have to buy an ipod to listen to your music.

30 years go by... The board at Apple has changed, Steve et al long since retired...Quality drops...Flash mem keeps frying, the batteries die every year a day or so out of warranty etc...You have no choice but to keep buying.

Ok a far-fetched vision, but it could happen.

[lbj]

But jh2112, your future excludes basic capitalistic market drivers. if there's money to be made, and/or desire not being met, someone else will jump in.

that's why we still have Apple despite MS's dominance. There is a demand and there is money to be made.

I'm not a big fan of "preemptive strikes". Are you saying Apple should be forced to change what they do today because of what might happen 30 years from now?

[fryke]

Yes, lbj, that's what "preemptive measures" means.

[jh2112]

but, Nooone else would be able to 'jump in',as you say. The record company would not be in a position to challenge Apple with another online service. Apple would simply threaten to boycott all further product and remove the current.
Apple have used this tactic, in the recent past...

As for 'preemptive strikes': presumably you're not a fan of Megan's Law? or any other legislation to prevent crime? violence? murder? Don't talk crap.