It's interesting to watch this unfold. The iTunes store is one of Apple's most successful products/services. If viewed as a product, one could make the case that they've spent millions building it, branding it, and integrating it in their infrastructure; then for another company to tap into it and benefit from Apple's product seems shady, like those old console systems that play NES/SNES games but aren't Nintendos. The Pre could be marketed as being like an iPhone, but not.
On the other hand, if seen as a service, it'd behoove Apple see it being used by as many people as possible, expanding its market reach.
The warning is a pretty savvy move. They can see how the profits line up. If iPhone sales drop more but profits are recouped in the store, they might have a quandary.
If the Itunes music store and Ipod were Microsoft properties there would be anti-trust investigations by now.
What Apple has done is nothing short of exclusionary. They gained the superior market position by recognizing the opportunity early, and marketing it well. I won't begrudge them that, they earned their initial share fair and square.
What I have a problem with is portability of any content I pay for. I don't care if its on Itunes, Zune, Napster, or inside a Tower Records, if I buy music, I should have the right to listen to that however I good well choose. Apple has worked hard to lock you out, sure there are ways around the restrictive DRM and the exclusionary Itunes service, but that's not the point. If I buy a song from your service, I should be able to take that anywhere I good well please without jumping through hoops first, if I want to load it onto a Creative player, or a Zune, or a Pre, why the heck should I not be permitted to do that with the greatest of ease?
The only logical answer is because Apple want's you tied to their hardware. Its that simple. Okay, while that seems like smart business, does it benefit the consumer? Not at all, and that's where Apple is on shaky ground.
I hope Palm continues to wag their middle finger at Apple calling them out.
This isn't even the most egregious of Apple's veiled threats. What I consider their biggest load of crap is the threats to sue anyone that attempts to produce a multi-touch product. There's no reason you should be able to patent a concept. Sure, go ahead and patent your particular implementation and if someone rips off your code that's one thing... However attempting to sue someone for making their own implementation of a concept is BS. The Android platform actually has all the code to support multi-touch... but it's commented out in the kernel presumably because of the veiled threats from Apple that they will sue anyone attempting to make a multi-touch device. What I'm hoping for is that Apple decides NOT to sue Palm for their multi-touch interface and that the OHA decides to uncomment that code!
Thrax
🐌Austin, TX Icrontian
Comments
On the other hand, if seen as a service, it'd behoove Apple see it being used by as many people as possible, expanding its market reach.
The warning is a pretty savvy move. They can see how the profits line up. If iPhone sales drop more but profits are recouped in the store, they might have a quandary.
What Apple has done is nothing short of exclusionary. They gained the superior market position by recognizing the opportunity early, and marketing it well. I won't begrudge them that, they earned their initial share fair and square.
What I have a problem with is portability of any content I pay for. I don't care if its on Itunes, Zune, Napster, or inside a Tower Records, if I buy music, I should have the right to listen to that however I good well choose. Apple has worked hard to lock you out, sure there are ways around the restrictive DRM and the exclusionary Itunes service, but that's not the point. If I buy a song from your service, I should be able to take that anywhere I good well please without jumping through hoops first, if I want to load it onto a Creative player, or a Zune, or a Pre, why the heck should I not be permitted to do that with the greatest of ease?
The only logical answer is because Apple want's you tied to their hardware. Its that simple. Okay, while that seems like smart business, does it benefit the consumer? Not at all, and that's where Apple is on shaky ground.
I hope Palm continues to wag their middle finger at Apple calling them out.