Real Begs Apple for Alliance 387
hype7 writes "In a an extremely forward move, CEO of Real Networks Rob Glaser has emailed Steve Jobs, imploring him to open up Apple's AAC Digital Rights Management System - FairPlay - to Real. The upside for Real - all music sold by them would be compatible with the iPod. The upside for Apple - Real would make the iPod its primary device for the RealNetworks store and for the RealPlayer software. However, Mr. Glaser wasn't just dangling carrots - he implied that should Apple not be a receptive partner for an alliance, he would be forced to look towards Microsoft. There was a similar post made not too long ago, with BusinessWeek's take on the whole thing." There's a Reuters story as well.
High Level of Fear? (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyway, Apple is hedging its bets in a few places. You can easily play OGG formats in iTunes (a tutorial in this month's MacAddict tells how to use the codec), and Apple even includes an OGG icon to use in OS X, though you have to do one or two (easy) things to make it work seamlessly. I don't think Apple is afraid of opening things up except that, for instance, supporting WMA or Real playback on iPods would endanger the iTunes Music Store sales, which provide zero or very little profit to Apple, IIRC, but which sure improve the sales of iPods. Where Real fits into the risk/reward equation is unclear, but why let Real just have a piece of the action? Doesn't look like the profit to Apple is that great.
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:5, Insightful)
Frankly, RealPlayer should not pressure Apple to do anything. Real represent all that is evil with software: they took a mediocre player (RealPlayer G2) and made it into a horrible mess of marketroid-fueled insanity. You can't even "quit" RealPlayer without being assaulted with pop-up ads begging you to buy the so-called "Gold" version.
Apple respects the consumer. That's why I pray they will never, ever, bow to this so-called "pressure" from Real.
Interestingly... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Interestingly... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Interestingly... (Score:2, Insightful)
Sorry. Real lost my trust years ago, and it'll take a tarball of C code to restore it.
Want a tarball? Here is a tarball (Score:4, Informative)
It looks like this will be RealPlayer 11. I am not sure how usable the code is at the moment though...
Re:Interestingly... (Score:4, Informative)
This is because they haven't begun shipping yet.
Re:Interestingly... (Score:3, Insightful)
When someone comes up and takes a dump on my desk it's very hard for me to take them seriously from that point on. I've very reluctantly gone back to using TurboTax this year, but Real has continually defectated upon not only my desk, but my keyboard, chair, and my new living room carpet. They can suck it.
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:3, Insightful)
Unlike Apple's Quicktime, which assaults you to buy the full version every time it starts up. No "Do not show me this again" or "Never" option and no way to navigate to the only possible option - "Later"
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:3, Informative)
Workaround for QT nag was[Re:High Level of Fear?] (Score:5, Informative)
The next time you see that nag should be the day after the date you set your date to in the future.
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:5, Informative)
Set your Mac clock a year or so into the future, reboot, play a quicktime file, (going past the nag screen), set clock back, reboot.
The nag screen will go away until 1 day after the date you chose.
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:3, Informative)
I just downloaded a "crackz" registration code off the internet. I don't have any interest in the "Pro" features - I just wanted to get rid of that annoying box that assailed me every time I used Quicktime.
Is that illegal? Quite frankly, I don't care. I'm just fixing my operating system, which I paid for. The advertised Quicktime support was broken, and I fixed it.
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:2, Informative)
That's not "easily", and ogg support is crippled.
It's not hedging either -- AAC/MP4 is far more popular than ogg. Outside of a few vocal slashdot posters, nobody cares about ogg.
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:2, Insightful)
What a crack addict.
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:5, Insightful)
Probably for the same reasons Microsoft would want to work with Sun after Sun dogged them for years. Microsoft would look at the deal objectively, and not emotionally, the way you did.
There are still plenty of sites out there that use or require the RealAudio format, and it's not dying anytime soon. Getting Real to switch to WMA would give Microsoft a slam dunk monopoly in streaming media. Why wouldn't Microsoft want that?
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is actually quite a common myth, they actually make about 30 cents a song, the comment about them breaking even was about(at that point) the fact that the amount of songs they have sold have basically covered development, server, and ad costs. Almost all of that is fixed costs, so they will have economy of scale. The store can become very profitable if it is able to sell a lot of songs.
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:3, Informative)
IIRC that's Apple's cut of the 99 cents. Out of that 30 cents comes all the cost of running the store -everything from paying salaries to bandwidth costs in addition to the costs you mentioned.
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:4, Informative)
Huh?
What he's saying was that the comment about the iTMS making little profit was referring to them having sold enough songs to cover the fixed costs - the initial costs of buying hardware, developing the store software, and running ads. As they're making about 30 cents a song, unit costs included, the store will make a profit - most likely quite a large one.
It hasn't provided a profit so far because all the money made went to paying off the initial investment. Now that that's (close to) done...
Seriously. Take a basic economics class.
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:2)
Not Invented Here... (Score:4, Interesting)
Steve does need to get a grip sometimes, and become more open. I'm not sure Real is that special company upon which to bet however. But Real aside, the concerns are the same.
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:3, Interesting)
If by easily, you mean downloading a third-party plugin, then sure. But give credit where credit is due. The guy who wrote the plugin deserves the praise. iTunes Ogg Vorbis support is certainly no thanks to Apple, and there are numerous problems with it as it stands, that *are* in fact their fault. Of all the OSes, all the MP3 players, all the music players I've ever used, Apple is by far the most anti-vorbis, and it really is the only thing that continues to bothe
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:2)
Flac doesn't provide a smaller enough file size to be worth it for an entire collection, imho... You get about 50% compression with flac (lossless, 10 minutes = 50 mb) but mp3 can give near 90% (lossy, 10 minutes = 10 mb) with great quality.
Re:High Level of Fear? (Score:3, Interesting)
Good! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Good! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Good! (Score:5, Funny)
(geek tries to impress prospective female)
geek: "Look at my cool iPod mini, it's wonderful." (hands the device to female)
female: "wow. it's pretty cute. kind of like you. let me play a song. (pushes button). hmmm. nothing is happening...what does 'buffering' mean?"
(girl walks off not impressed)
Re:Good! (Score:5, Funny)
you have it all wrong. Its more like:
(geek tries to impress prospective female)
geek: "Look at..."
(girl walks off)Re:Good! (Score:3, Funny)
Prospective adj. Likely to become or be: prospective clients.
Translation: (Geek tries to impress pre-op male-to-female transsexual).
Real Audio will be the least of his worries.
Re:Good! (Score:3, Funny)
I think you overestimate the social skills of
(geek tries to impress prospective female)
Geek: Erm....
Geek: Uh...
(girl walks off)
Good to see (Score:5, Funny)
Answer for Real is obvious! (Score:3, Funny)
The ol' Hardware Monopoly (Score:3, Insightful)
It's very much like Microsoft, but with a twist. Some of my least favorite stunts:
1. Not allowing a person to upgrade a DVD/CD drive to a Superdrive. I bought my PowerMac two months before the superdrive was released. I get to use stupid DVD-RAM disks, but I can't burn DVD's unless I buy a whole new computer.
2. Apple keeps its iSync API locked up. There are millions of really cool things I could do to make Apple able to synchronize with things like LDAP servers, competing browsers, PC's, etc. But then Apple could use it as a leverage-point to keep people subscribing to the overpriced
3. USB video cameras, like the ubiquitous Logitech QuickCam, just don't work (well) and Apple seems to have put blocks into place to refuse iChat AV from working with anything but their iSight hardware product. (I exaggerate a little bit here, but not much.)
The iPod Quicktime-AAC is just another example. Where Microsoft fights to protect it's OS dominence, Apple refuses to make its customers' lives better if it suggests that they might loose the odd dollar in missed hardware sales opportunities.
Re:The ol' Hardware Monopoly (Score:5, Insightful)
Or you could just buy an superiour quality DVD recorder [macminute.com] from a third-party. Unlike Microsoft, Apple allows you to use all standards-compliant hardware with their DVD burning software.
2. Apple keeps its iSync API locked up. There are millions of really cool things I could do to make Apple able to synchronize with things like LDAP servers, competing browsers, PC's, etc. But then Apple could use it as a leverage-point to keep people subscribing to the overpriced
Funny that you mention LDAP; Apple supports LDAP in its acclaimed Mail application [macosxhints.com], so you don't need to write so much as a speck of code to enable it. Getting LDAP support to work is easy as pie.
I don't subscribe to
3. USB video cameras, like the ubiquitous Logitech QuickCam, just don't work (well) and Apple seems to have put blocks into place to refuse iChat AV from working with anything but their iSight hardware product. (I exaggerate a little bit here, but not much.)
Such is the price of progress. Face it: USB cameras simply don't have the throughput to push television-quality video the likes of which iChat AV with Pixlet can support. Would you take vacation photos with a so-called "camera phone" [mobog.com]? I know I wouldn't. My wife and children enjoy seeing me using iSight: it's a high-quality multivisual experience. Sorry that your piece-of-junk QuickCam won't work with it.
Re:The ol' Hardware Monopoly (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple's camera isn't TV quality either. TV quality video requires at minimum a three-chip camera, and they don't sell for less than $1500.
Re:The ol' Hardware Monopoly (Score:5, Informative)
Funny that you mention LDAP; Apple supports LDAP in its acclaimed Mail application, so you don't need to write so much as a speck of code to enable it. Getting LDAP support to work is easy as pie.
I don't subscribe to
While the LDAP integration is handy, I don't think it addresses the original poster's point.
My company has a fairly extendable product suite that includes mail, calendar, and contact management. If I could write an iSync conduit to our database, I'd be able to check my calendar and get alarms from my Powerbook, iPod or Bluetooth phone.
That would let me use the interface(s) I like with the data I need, and would let us market OS X as a fully-supported platform. No, my company would probably never have an impact on Apple's bottom line, but as it stands now we can only offer syncronization with Windows users. In the meantime I've got this great all-in-one syncing solution that's completely useless to me, which is pretty frustrating.
Re:The ol' Hardware Monopoly (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The ol' Hardware Monopoly (Score:4, Insightful)
Or get an external one. They work great too.
The iSync API pisses me off as well though. We'd love to develop inhouse syncing conduits, but can't.
Re:The ol' Hardware Monopoly (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The ol' Hardware Monopoly (Score:3, Informative)
You exaggerate massively, in fact. No USB devices work without a third-party driver, but all firewire cams work. I use iChat AV via a JVC camcorder, for example.
Cheers,
Ian
Re:The ol' Hardware Monopoly (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, anyone is free to add any internal or external hardware device they wish, including DVD+/-R/RW drives. However, if you wanted to use *specific* software, like iDVD, with your drive, then you needed to mirror one of Apple's OEM offerings with your purchase. The reason Apple tried to tie iDVD to their "SuperDrive" systems was more one of ensuring a very cohesive user experience, as opposed to the nightmare of support issues and bad reputation for iDVD as people with 400 MHz G4s tried to use iDVD with any old random DVD recorder.
2. Apple keeps its iSync API locked up. There are millions of really cool things I could do to make Apple able to synchronize with things like LDAP servers, competing browsers, PC's, etc. But then Apple could use it as a leverage-point to keep people subscribing to the overpriced
It's only a matter of time before there's an iSync SDK. And the second statement is kind of unrelated; if you think
3. USB video cameras, like the ubiquitous Logitech QuickCam, just don't work (well) and Apple seems to have put blocks into place to refuse iChat AV from working with anything but their iSight hardware product. (I exaggerate a little bit here, but not much.)
ANY FireWire video source will work with iChat AV. Any video source at all will work with iChatUSBCam [ecamm.com]. Again, this decision was made to ensure a good user experience across the board with iChat AV, rather than letting people use any old crappy USB camera, which, right or wrong, reflects poorly on iChat AV.
There is a reason why Apple products work and look great: because Apple tries hard to keep it that way.
The iPod Quicktime-AAC is just another example. Where Microsoft fights to protect it's OS dominence, Apple refuses to make its customers' lives better if it suggests that they might loose the odd dollar in missed hardware sales opportunities.
Well, first, you have to have a monopoly to start talking about monopolistic practices. Even with iPod, Apple doesn't have nearly a "monopoly". And QuickTime, while proprietary, is one of the best media architectures out there, with free live encoding, free streaming servers for multiple platforms, ability to use open standards for playback anywhere, etc. Not to mention that it was primarily Apple and Apple alone that made MPEG-4's licensing - one of the only hopes against Microsoft's VC9 - licensing leaps and bounds more palatable [com.com] than it originally was [com.com]. And Apple has to keep its hardware sales up, lest the analysts start a death knell [google.com] for the 1000th time.
Re:The ol' Hardware Monopoly (Score:5, Insightful)
Where I differ in opinion is with your complaint about Apple locking their software to their own expensive hardware and services.
"2. Apple keeps its iSync API locked up [...] keep people subscribing to the overpriced
3. USB video cameras, like the ubiquitous Logitech QuickCam, just don't work [...] with anything but their iSight hardware product. (I exaggerate a little bit here, but not much.)"
It's Apple's sales strategy to develop free, or low cost, software to sell additional hardware and services. I hardly see anything wrong with that. In fact it's a great strategy since the software is excellent and there are alternatives available so you are not locked in. You can use AIM or Yahoo messenger instead of iChat if you choose. Yes, I wish my Logitech camera worked with iChat AV because I don't want to buy the expensive iSight camera. But I think it's fair that they give me a great IM program and offer advanced video features if I choose to use the supported hardware. Again, I can choose otherwise and am not locked in. Same with iSync, it's free and works with a lot of things out of the box. But you get more if you buy their
Re:The ol' Hardware Monopoly (Score:2)
The driver made by IOXperts [ioxperts.com] runs my Logitech QuickCam 3000 Pro just fine, and gives me much more flexibility than Logitech's stinking software does. There are lots of options for changing the video size, and the video and audio compression. I was pretty upset when I first bought my mac and learned that Logitech has orphaned the QuickCam Pro 3000 on mac OS X, but as soon as I had it up and running with the IOXperts driver I was happy to have better software anyway. (Logitech's customer support recommends
Re:The ol' Hardware Monopoly (Score:2)
2) This is true, but I wouldn't consider this a "stunt". There's other syncing software, or if you have something in particular in mind you could right
Re:The ol' Hardware Monopoly (Score:3, Interesting)
You can buy DVD recorders and DVD recording software for you Mac. Apple isn't stopping you.
I agree with you on the iSync part. Hopefully it will eventually be a published API.
The 'other' memo: (Score:5, Funny)
Please please please open Fair Play to use. Please please please. We'll be your best friend. Promise. Plllllleeeeeeeeeeaaaaaassssee! Come on, be a pal! Please please please.
Love,
Real
-m
Re:The 'other' memo: (Score:5, Funny)
Stevie, plz let me use it. omg i will give u lots of $$. U R sooooo kewl n i wnt 2 be like u!!!!11
r341-1337 (30.
ps-plz?
Closed standards. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Closed standards. (Score:3, Informative)
What the hell are you babbling about, and how did this get modded +4 Interesting?
I can't speak to Real's formats being proprietary, although as I understand it, they are based upon open standards. Rather, I'll focus on AAC.
AAC is an open standard, part of the MPEG4 specification. Anyone can license it. The objectionable part of Apple's for-pay music store is
My thoughts on the players (Score:3, Insightful)
I despise Real Player and it's unreasonable level of pop-ups and advertising. It is one of the most invasive pieces of software out there.
Re:My thoughts on the players (Score:3, Informative)
Hell, you can even listen to Real's audio tracks without even having to install anything [winamp.com], if you want.
If they don't want to open up their propietary DRM'ed formats, open them up for them.
Real looking for a reason to exist (Score:5, Insightful)
Real won't be missed, it hasn't done anything of value to the marketplace or userbase for years now.
forced to look towards Microsoft ?!? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:forced to look towards Microsoft ?!? (Score:2)
Real...y? (Score:5, Funny)
Is it me.... (Score:5, Funny)
And hitting the government cheese pretty hard as well
I actually think this could be good (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyway. It all boils down to "What does Apple want?" If it wants to sell iPods, this is part of the whole "killer move" thing. Right now, I can use my iPod with iTunes Music Store and Audible.com. And since I already shelled out $300 for this portable hard drive/music player, if you're not compatible, I don't want to hear it.
Licensing Fairplay to Real (and yes, I know that Fairplay isn't owned by Apple, but I'm willing to bet they've got an "exclusive agreement" and enough clout to convince the actual owners to let Real in on the fun) would, as the header notes, make the iPod work with Rhapsody. I'm not about to sign up for Rhapsody, but all of the sudden, those "Apple's trying to lock you into their own technology" arguments go out the window. And it sets a good precident: ask Apple nicely, and you can use their service.
But - this is only if Apple sees the prize as iPods. If they see the prize as becoming the de facto standard for online music, which would put them in a very powerful position, they could say "Hm - we have about 60% of all legal music downloads now, and the #1 portable MP3 players. Forget it, Real."
Personally, I think a combination of the two is in order: license with Real as they did with Audible.com. Let Real sell "iPod compatible" songs off of Rhapsody and whatever - but make those same tunes available through iTMS, just like you can buy Audible's site or through the iTunes interface. Everybody gets to sell something, and Apple will gain the "subscription services" so people can pick and choose thier poisen.
Of course, I could be totally wrong - but I won't mind if this scenario plays out.
Re:I actually think this could be good (Score:2, Informative)
Re:I actually think this could be good (Score:3, Interesting)
Very good thing for Apple to do (Score:5, Interesting)
Image! (Score:5, Informative)
Compare Real... The free player, while no longer buried as deep as it used to be, is still behind a text link in a grey box next to the big, shiny Premium Download button. Upon download, you're innundated with a page featuring "Real Accessories", which are little more than sponsored links to unrelated software.
Real is going to have a tough time of convincing Jobs that Apple really wants to associate with them...
Re:Image! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Image! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Image! (Score:3, Funny)
I can just imagine Steve looking at that picture of Glazer, with his Boss Hogg face and "Burberry" tie, shaking his head and saying "Is it any wonder that everything having to do with this player is second-rate?"
What would they change the name of real player to? (Score:5, Funny)
The Fairplayer?
iReal player?
or just call it the RIAA (Real itunes apple authorized) player?
Thoughts (Score:2, Insightful)
Why are you forgetting? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why are you forgetting? (Score:3, Informative)
On Windows, perhaps. On OS X, RealPlayer is just a lil' app and browser plugin that plays Real-format files. No more, no less.
Funnily enough, even Windows Media Player for OS X is totally ad-free and stripped down. Shame it's got pretty crappy performance.
MSN Messenger for O
High level communication (Score:5, Insightful)
Hopefully both Apple and Microsoft ignore Real (Score:3, Insightful)
Has anyone really used their junk since like version 3 or 4 when it became so laden with addons and hidden hitchhikers that no one in their right mind would install their crap?
So hopefully both M$ and Apple will ignore Real networks and then Real will hopefully die soon.
Yeah I know, dream on, but hey, I'm a romantic at heart.
Let Real Die (Score:5, Insightful)
"Let them die."
I will not miss Real too much and I know very few of us will. They make a buggy crappy player and it competed with another buggy crappy player for a different equally crappy format. The company with the bigger bank account won. No surprise there. I play my
Apple has nothing to gain by helping Real and it is unlikely that Microsoft wants anything to do with Real except maybe to wait until they are about to collapse and buy them out to own the format.
No one uses Realplayer to play mp3's except for those systems that downloaded the RealOne operating system and can't use anything else to play media files anymore.
Interesting (Score:4, Interesting)
"BUT BITCH, I SAID BIIIITCH, I AIN'T GONNA GO FOR IT, NOT NOW, NOT EVEAH!" - SD
Re:Interesting (Score:3, Informative)
Not exactly genuine (Score:5, Insightful)
There's no way Jobs (or anyone at Apple) is going to respond to such a blatant PR move by a floundering company less than 1/10 its size.
Microsoft has the deep pockets and market power to win with these kinds of strong-arm blackmail tactics, but Real? Come on.
I think it's sad Glaser is doing it this way, because there are good arguments for Apple opening up Fairplay to other music services. But Apple is very secretive about its partnerships and alliances (Apple writes into its contracts with manufacturing outsourcing and component producers that they can't publicly admit to it) and they won't want to be seen as even responding to this kind of public pressure from a piss-ant company like Real.
Re:Not exactly genuine (Score:3, Funny)
Hey, this is the tech industry!
It's beleaguered company, you insensitive clod!
Please Applet, dont do it! (Score:3, Insightful)
Real on the other hand is one of the most misunderstood companies out there. Legitimate on the exterior, Real is all but that at it's core (http://jogin.com/weblog/archives/2004/03/06/real
Real is deceptive, not technologically innovative, and unfriendly towards Linux.
Apple partnering with Real would be a horrible position to take.
It took a lot of work to get Darwin and Panther to work. No doubt Apple has *very intelligent* people working for them. Take some of the talent pool, and direct them towards developing a streaming media protocol that leverages existing formats (mpeg for example). Real hasn't done anything quite innovative lately (yes, their protocol was innovative when it came out ?5? years ago).
I have no doubt in my mind that Apple could put together:
a.) a more efficient wire protocol
b.) reach more people than Real
c.) make the interface intuitive and able to be skinned / themed
d.) do this in less time
Real is dying (search
A Bit Overstated, Don't You Think? (Score:2)
Begging? The tone of the article doesn't show any "begging". But it's nice the poster wants to give us some drama here on Slashdot while painting Real as weak and pitiful and Apple as mighty and in control of the whole game. "Oooh! DRAMA!!! Watch out Redmond Bill! Cupertino Steve and the Glaser might make an Alliance to vote you off!"
Not very realistic or honest wording. Not that I like Real, I don't care. But why the insults?
I don't get it. (Score:4, Interesting)
Does he think that he will "win" either way?
Apple and REAL apparently tried some sort of an agreement a couple of years ago, but it fell through because REAL wanted access to all Apple's QT code, but would not give up any of the REALplayer code to Apple.
It appears he is just looking for ANY publicity at all for REAL.
But of course, there is no such thing as "bad" publicity!
Who, in their right mind, would team up w/ Real? (Score:2)
Do they even make a profit from anything OTHER than Ad revenue? Both Apple AND MS should give them a big, "Go away," so we can be done with them once and for all. They're struggling here.
Oh god, please no! (Score:2)
I WAS thinking this was a good idea (Score:5, Interesting)
Then I started to think about the competing stores. It doesn't really do either of them any good to be selling the same songs, usually at the same price. I suppose it DOES give incentive to each of them to differentiate from the other store, but that's on TOP of the work that they have to do to offer more than the stores that use WMA.
I think Real's best proposition would be to somehow license the iTunes music store. Rather than set up a whole store on their own which is a huge waste of money - and arguably unsustanable - they could make it so it's possible to buy from the iTMS through their player. Steve would have to hand down some strict interface guidelines, but suddenly the Real player would have a lot of ACTUAL value added. Starting up their own store kind of looks like value added, but it's really just a gimmick when it's so hard to make money, do it properly, sell good music, etc.
Look to microsoft... (Score:2)
Well... (Score:2, Funny)
Real switching to WMA compatibility? (Score:3, Insightful)
At first, I thought an Apple/Real alliance might be a good thing. After all, it's well known that iTMS is a loss-leader for Apple, so why not let Real have a share of the red ink?
However, if Real is trying to form an alliance, it can only mean that they believe that they are in trouble. In that case, having no alliance would mean that the market would only shake out Real that much more quickly, leaving Apple and Microsoft as the sole competitors.
Still, Apple is not good at forming strategic alliances. They always underestimate Microsoft. Always. An alliance with Real might slow Real's departure, but it also might slow Microsoft's advance, and for that reason should be seriously considered.
But here we have Glasser insulting Jobs in the press. Gee, when was the last time YOU were won over by public insults.
So yeah, Jobs should probably accept, but he's not gonna, because he's got too much pride.
Glaser's previous comments about Apple (Score:5, Informative)
"... dismissing Apple's iTunes service, he points to Real's Rhapsody music service with 1.3m subscribers - which 'in the United States is number one'."
July 2003 [wired.com]
"It's hard to design a better scenario for us than what Apple did. Apple serves only 5 percent of the market, and it doesn't offer an all-you-can-eat service, just downloads. One of our challenges is teaching consumers about digital music. It's great having Steve Jobs get the word out, since we have the best service for the 95 percent of people who don't use a Mac."
September 2001 [businessweek.com]
"One of [the] surest ways you could drive Bill nuts was to say that Apple is the company that innovates, and Microsoft is the company that iterates. But I think it's basically true. My goal was to create a company culture that has the same pioneering, innovative spirit that one associates with Apple and that has the persistence, a willingness to go nose to the grindstone, that one associates classically [with] Japanese manufacturing companies, like Matsushita, and with Microsoft."
Now, to put the current Real/Apple relationship in perspective, take a look at this May, 2001 tidbit [businessweek.com]:
"Today, Glaser's RealNetworks, with 26 million users, beats out both Microsoft's and Apple's offerings. Apple, which has slipped to No. 3 behind Microsoft, continues to lose ground. In January, the number of QuickTime users fell to 7.29 million, down 8.4% from a year earlier, according to a recent survey by market researcher Jupiter Media Matrix. Windows Media Player had 21.5 million users, according to the same study."
Sounds like Glaser is trying really hard to make his position look solid, but he sees the writing on the wall. Consumers are fed up with Real's "hunt for the free download" tactics, and aren't taking to Real 10 the way he'd hoped.
It's not about codec technology anymore... (Score:4, Interesting)
So they want Fairplay? Apple should ask Real to provide that broadband content. No specifics, but I'll bet that people that own Apples tend to have broadband easily accessible. Apple can choose to pass on the content in their Quicktime channels for free, or bundle some with their .Mac service (hey, maybe I'd even consider getting it if I did that.)
It would definitely make for an interesting combination.
The desperate actions of a desperate company (Score:5, Interesting)
QuickTime is far superior. Hell, even WindowsMedia is superior. Real knows their only real hope (pun intended!) is to hitch their wagon to a winning team and ride those coattails until the cows come home.
I personally hope Apple bitch-slaps them back to their hole in the wall, and I hope Microsoft just outright buys them to shut them up (in this singular case I'd be all for that tactic from MS!).
Real just annoys me to no end, and their demise, bu whatever means, can't come soon enough for me.
*
Omnytex Technologies [omnytex.com] - Where dreams and software unite
K&G Arcade [kgarcade.com] - 26 games in one, a unique blend of action, adventure and humor
Invasion: Trivia! [invasiontrivia.com] - Trivia, with a very sick twist!
Electro [omnytex.com] - The premiere electronics tool for PocketPC
Real needs to die. (Score:4, Interesting)
Darwin/Quicktime Streaming Server is a better streaming server solution, and it's free.
Apple partnering with Real? Why? Apple should only partner with Real if they drop Real and go with Quicktime. And at that point, why should Real even exist?
Frankly, WMP is better supported on my platform (Linux KDE/KMplayer/Konq) than Real (the KMplayer kpart bones javascript tests for rm plugins), so what's the point of Real?
Add in the asinine hiding of the free player, and the verdict is:
Death by irrelevance.
the codecs (Score:5, Funny)
BUFFERING....
Neo looks down and sees a black cat and then BUFFERING.... BUFFERING... he sees it again.
Neo: deja vu
*Trinity and Morpheus turn around quick, the fast movement of their heads producing a blurred mass of pixels*
Trinty: WHAT DID you say? (audio volume goes from high down to low half volume tin-can resonance for some unknown reason)
Neo: I said... BUFFERING... *screp* *scraaW*
Trinity: *screp* *sreeep*.... BUFFERING....a glitch in the codec
FIVE MINUTE WAIT, 86% LOADED.
Cut to an action scene in slow-mo lots of trails and effects behind the bullets. But it's slow mo in the part where Agent Real comes from hiding behind the grocery bag and shoots at neo.... the part that wasn't slow-mo in the cinema. Directors cut maybe... BUFFERING.....
POPUP - WOULD YOU LIKE TO BUY REALPLAYER GOLD!
BUFFERING..70% RELOADED...
Neo: but I thought I uninstalled you.
Agent Real: I knew I was supposed to follow orders and remove my files and registry entries but
bakcwards??? (Score:3)
Is Real that bad off now?
Go do whatever you like... (Score:3, Flamebait)
...cos I'm just going to keep using ogg vorbis and mp3 files ripped from CD.
Your DRM encumbered, proprietary malware is redundant.
why FairPlay is closed... (Score:3, Interesting)
RealPlayer 10 Rocks my face off (Score:4, Informative)
First, the annoying Adware defaults to off, except for alerts relating to software updates. You can shut those off, too (you couldn't in the past) simply by clicking on the "View Real Message Center" icon, then click on "Options -> Customize Message Center" and uncheck Software Updates, then click Save Changes. No more popups.
And if you're really paranoid (I am) you can go to Tools->Preferences, then navigate to Connection->Internet/Privacy and uncheck all the privacy settings. You're anonymous.
What do you have left? A great player that can play anything except Ogg Vorbis (which pains me, believe me). But it plays iTunes AAC files, MPEG4, MP3, AVI, QuickTime, DVDs, CDs, RealAudio/Video, WAV, Windows Media, AIFF, and more.
I bought 7 songs from Real's music store this week and I couldn't be happier. The downloads were fast, the quality incredible (192 Kbps AAC files compared with iTune's 128 Kbps AAC files and Napster's 128 Kbps WMA files) and has the best, most liberal license for its users IMHO.
I've also heard people say that Real is Linux-Unfriendly. WHA? It's the only company that makes a Linux client. There is no Windows Media Player or iTunes for Linux, but there is a RealPlayer for Linux. In fact, it allows you to play your Apple iTunes music on your Linux box. I think that's very Linux-friendly.
Happy Real Customer tryin' to keep it real....
Re:Maybe it's just me... (Score:5, Insightful)
Cut to Real. Ouch, just finiding their free player on their site is a pain in the ass, not to mention all the spyware, the bloated nature of their products... their number one seems to be their advertisers, then their bottom line, then the consumer. My opinion of Apple would go down if they associated themselves with these fools.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Realplayer in linux (Score:3, Interesting)
I've had good luck with it. It plays real video and audio streams quite well. And like the latest Real Player software there is no annoying spyware or ads.
I agree with you about the Linux Real Player 8 - it really sucked. But fortunately there's a good upgrade path.