Comments on: Time for Apple to face the music?

By: Adam Clarke

Adam Clarke — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:01:07 +0000

Every time I stumble across your work it is Apple bashing. Critical for the sake of it? I know its your job, but there is other tech news to harp on about. And stuff I would like to read about too.

I tried to respond to the article on the BBC site but I had to come here to do it instead, looking above this post I see I am not the only one slightly disappointed with your comments, I wonder if anything will appear on the BBC site?

By: Mark Jones

Mark Jones — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 11:43:59 +0000

Do you want to explain why yet again you are saying people are ‘Locked into.’ the Apple world when they purchase music off iTunes?

Mark

By: Jeff Dyer

Jeff Dyer — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 18:58:31 +0000

Bill,

You analogy of Apple and Microsoft re the iPod is flawed. No-one is forced to or even needs to buy an i-Pod. There are many superior products availabel for playing music.

You buy into iPod and iTunes etc by choice. In fact you are buying into a second rate audio product with first rate and expensive marketing. Your choice.

With MS products however there is some difference. They are the de facto standards and everyone needs to be able to work with them.

Big difference.

Regards,

Jeff Dyer

By: J Davies

J Davies — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 13:56:15 +0000

In January 2007, The Register and others reported that Norway, France and Germany were very unhappy about Apples DRM, so I don't think that this is new (I don't remember how this panned out). What is new is the fact that the European court has come down on the side of the anti-monopolists at last.I suspect a lot of this will depend upon the legal definitions of monopoly and market in the context of music downloads. For example, Tesco's download site sells music in Microsoft's WMA format so forcing apple to open up without forcing MS to open up would simply hand the market to MS.

By: whasther

whasther — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 12:52:41 +0000

you might want to take a look at this:

http://roughlydrafted.com/RD/TechQ307/Entries/2007/9/20_BBC_Prints_Irresponsible_Rubbish_on_Apple.html

I’m sorry, but your articles are pushing me away from the BBC News website. Before you write more, try actually reading in to a subject, try actually knowing a little tiny bit about what you’re talking about.

There are a large number of people out there that don’t know the facts – and if you’re in the position to teach them something, then TEACH THEM THE RIGHT THING, DAMNIT!

By: Mike Hall

Mike Hall — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 12:20:53 +0000

Surely Steve Jobs’ attempts to persuade the music industry to move away from DRM represents willingness from Apple to allow interoperability?

If all iTunes music was downloaded DRM-free then the inability of third party applications to access the iTunes library directly is irrelevant. Those applications can compile their own library from the raw files downloaded from the iTunes store (or, more likely, ripped from CD).

So long as the music files themselves are available for any application or player to use then is it really a problem for Apple to require iPod users to synch via iTunes?

By: Grey Wolf

Grey Wolf — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:05:33 +0000

Because people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones, and because Bill has always struck me as fair until this article, here is a counter-article that calls Bill on all the exagerations, false facts and lies he has spouted here:

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/TechQ307/Entries/2007/9/20_BBC_Prints_Irresponsible_Rubbish_on_Apple.html

Very poor fact-checks there, Bill. Very disapointed.

Yours,

Grey Wolf

By: Jonathan Roberts

Jonathan Roberts — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 08:33:57 +0000

I read this article on BBC’s website, and while I agree with your sentiments exactly (when the news about the hash was announced, I sent a mail to a LUG along these lines), I feel if you really disagree with their business practices you shouldn’t be supporting the company by buying 3 Macs and 2 iPods!

They might be great products, but there are open alternatives. You mention Banshee and Rhythmbox in your article so clearly you’re aware of this – just seems a shame that your actions don’t seem to quite meet your words.

Jon

By: philip

philip — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 04:34:48 +0000

Well well, you too have been duped into writing propaganda for the Microsoft/old media cartel that wants to extract pay-per-play taxes from every citizen by locking down content distribution with hardware enforced time expiring DRM, now that it is virtually free for anyone to distribute content. And irony of ironies, you’ve done it for the BBC, with their public service remit, which should mean their content is freely available to UK citizens, without DRM, instead of which we’re getting the iPlayer nonsense.

Can’t you see that Apple is single-handedly preventing the lockdown of all content by means of generous use rights on iTunes music store content and its non-expiring DRM? Even buy-to-own Microsoft DRM expires and must constantly be refreshed.

There’s a war going on, and you’re saying the opponents are equally wicked because they are both fighting. There is no doubt that, at least for now, Apple is clearly on the side of the consumer, and MS plus old media are clearly wanting to exploit the consumer with playback plans similar to cellphone “calling plans”, and satellite TV “viewing plans” that manipulate consumers through cross-linkage and bundling (sounds familiar?). It’s not surprising that little Apple (little in the context of this battle) takes care not to be ambushed or tricked until fair use prevails over “milk the consumer”.

For some specific counter-points, read this.

By: Bryan

Bryan — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 00:24:20 +0000

Man, this is a truly lame attempt to carry the water for Microsoft. I would go through all the reasons your article is a mess of bad logic and faulty analogies, but someone already did it for me: BBC Prints Irresponsible Rubbish On Apple