Depends on how you look at it... software/game you buy for a PC can't be used on a Mac, but I believe a lot of that is changing... is that correct? Either way, I think it's pretty silly. Some people like using iTunes but don't have an iPod. Some people hate iTunes and have an iPod. Apple is calling it state sponsered piracy, some others may look at it as trying to build a monopoly. I don't see the big deal considering iTunes is free. Who cares what application you use to shop for music. It should all be interchangable.

__________________
Originally Posted by Roc3b "Great, so Gman landed a nympho with a brain! Damn him!
Guinness you lucky son of a byotch!!!!!!!!!!!"

http://www.bmwcca.org
http://www.sunbeltbmwcca.org

I agree with Guinness from the standpoint that it should all be interchangable. However, from an Apple standpoint, I would see it as piracy. If I invested in all the R&D to develop something with certain expectations of long standing laws being applied, I'd be pissed. As a consumer (who has an I-pod and hates I-tunes), this is a good thing. At least short term, I'm concerned about potential longer term impacts that may not be considered.

Not sure I understand. What is the (HATE) factor for iTunes?

__________________
"What you hear in a great jazz band is the sound of democracy. “The jazz band works best when participation is shaped by intelligent communication.”
Harmony happens whenever different parts get to form a whole by means of congruity, concord, symetry, consistency, conformity, correspondence, agreement, accord, unity, consonance…….

If I paid money and couldn't use the music as I pleased, and wouldn't that be a potential loss of income for Apple? The General mentality is to sell to as many markets and households as possible, I dunno if they don't know how to (which is BS) or it's just their ego?

__________________
The Present:
2014 Audi Q5 TDI Prestige
The Past:
2013 Lexus GS350
2013 VW Golf TDI
2007 BMW X5 4.8i LOADED & Loved
2009 VW Jetta
2008 VW Touareg VR6
2005 BMW X5 3.0i
2005 BMW Z4 3.0i
2004 BMW X5 3.0i
2003 BMW 325i
2000 Ford Explorer Eddie Bauer 4x4

I don't like/Hate i-Tunes because it is somewhat limited in what music they provide. Specifically artist on some of the smaller labels are not available through i-Tunes. So, if you can only use your i-Pod with i-Tunes, you would need a second player for other artist. Plus some of the remixes etc that are created by some of the independent djs aren't on i-tunes.

There is/was speculation that Sony's music site/player as well as the Microsoft "i-Pod Killer" could further limit what songs you can get on each site due to seprate and exclusive deals etc - on the other hand, this could just lead to more competition and all sites having more music.

Again, from a consumer standpoint, I like this. I don't have to be limited to what player and music I can download to play on the player. That will open up many more choices (and probably piracy - but that's another issue).

Setting aside the iPod issue for a second, I wanted to bring up some points regarding proprietary systems which has always been at the forefront of Apple's marketing strategy since it's the very first Macintosh computer.

Some general statements:

Windows based programs can be run only on the Windows operating system which can be run on any brand computer designed to run the Windows OS, including Dell, HP, Gateway, Lenovo, Alien, home-built, etc.

Apple OS based programs can be run only on the Apple operating system which can be run only Apple computers. There are no other brands of Apple computers except Apple. There was a Apple clone company back in the early 80's, Franklin Computer, but Apple snuffed them in the courts.

The various gaming systems are better examples of proprietary systems that follow the Apple business model. A CD-rom made for the MS X-Box cannot be played on a Sony Playstation or vice-versa.

The question is whether or not the Apple business model is acceptable and justifiable to the consumer. Does the model injure the customer in any way? In my opinion, the answer is no. The customer has a right to choose buy Apple products and accept its business model or to purchase another brand if they disagee with the proprietary system concept.

I think the French are wrong, but after all, they are French. IMHO, these issues should not be regulated in the courts. I also do not believe that Apple's restriction of iTunes use for iPods is not associated with DRM rights, but more aligned with Apple's insistence to maintain proprietary ownership of anything marketed and sold under the Apple brand.

I own an iPod and I do use iTunes, both as a music organizer and to purchase music. I have no problems with it, and I am able to convert iTunes purchased music to MP3's using iTunes under the method I described in Michelle's thread.

The inherent limitations of a proprietary system will eventually cause its failure if those limitations cause customers to find other alternatives. Witness yesterday's announcement that AOL will no longer be a pay service, but instead offer its portal services for free. The proprietary nature of AOL - a development driven by what I'm sure is was a loss of customers using Yahoo, MSN, Google, and other free services.

Exact a mundo. Nobody but no body was paying Apple a bit of attention until they started to make some noise now it's HOLD ON YOU CAN'T DO THAT!!! You have to share with us.

I agree "The customer has a right to choose buy Apple products and accept its business model or to purchase another brand if they disagee with the proprietary system concept. "

__________________
"What you hear in a great jazz band is the sound of democracy. “The jazz band works best when participation is shaped by intelligent communication.”
Harmony happens whenever different parts get to form a whole by means of congruity, concord, symetry, consistency, conformity, correspondence, agreement, accord, unity, consonance…….

The issue here is related to the online downloading of music, not the software on the iPod. Imagine that Microsoft had designed their Windows software so that it could only connect to the internet using their MSN service as the Inernet Service Provider. That would be the equivalent to what Apple has done in making their iPod only be able to download music from the iTunes service. It is indeed an anti-trust violation.

If Apple can get away with this, then they might as well design their computers to only be able to download music from iTunes and not from other services. Maybe Microsoft should start their own music download service and design the Windows operating system so that it can only download music from their service and not from other services. Maybe Sony should start a Cable Television Service and make their TVs so that they can only receive broadcasts from their own Cable service, and not from Direct TV or Cablevision, or other providers.

Do you see where this is going?

You are correct that nobody paid them any attention when their market share was small. That is because you cannot be in violation of anti-trust legislation unless you have a very large market share. If only 5% of the music players owned by consumers were iPods, then that would not be enough to infringe on other music download services. But Apple's market share is approaching 100% -- they sell far more than all the other music players put together. As a result, by not making their music player compatible with other music download providers, they will essentially put these other companies out of business. With iPods making up the lion's share of the music players owned by consumers, I don't think a music download service can compete with iTunes. It would not matter how good their selection of music was, or how user friendly their service was, or what they charged for downloads, because most consumers would not be able to use their downloads with their Ipods. The end result would be a monopoly for Apple.

If this is not an anti-trust violation, then what would be? I cannot think of a better example of an anti-trust violation.

I'll just add here that I am in the music business. I own a music publishing company that licenses "production music" to studios and producers for use in television production. The most common audio editing system used by studios is called "Pro Tools". They have a very large market share -- most of my clients use this system. If Avid (the company that makes Pro Tools) were to decide they were going to enter the music business and they were to release their own library of production music, and then design their software so that their editing system could only use their branded music, I would be out of business tomorrow. That is essentially what Apple is doing with the iPod and iTunes download service.

By definition, a "trust" is when you use a dominant market share in one industry to force competition out of business in another industry and gain a monopoly in that industry as well. It is an unfair business practice which should not be allowed.