EU law states that anti-competitive practices are illegal.
Tbh I don't know what the problem is any more, I don't care about DRM, sync'ing, I just want to listen to music and for this weekend to be over
Apple and anti competitive practices.
- Thread starter Burnsy2023
- Start date
EU law states that anti-competitive practices are illegal.
Tbh I don't know what the problem is any more, I don't care about DRM, sync'ing, I just want to listen to music and for this weekend to be over
Yeah im still not sure what any of this has to do with anti-monopoly rules. You buy an ipod as a music player and use itunes. You are able to buy any other music player and still use songs from the itunes music store on it.
Apple fixed a bug in their software that another company was using to try and further their own sales and that is wrong?
Apple fixed a bug in their software that another company was using to try and further their own sales and that is wrong?
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
you'd have a hard time calling somebody on a zen
ignoring DRM issues and anythign else for a moment, all this boils down to is that apple dont want people syncing other devices to itunes. If i were to use itunes to manage my music, it would not hamper the functionality of my sony walkman in any way, shape or form. i cant see how that's anti-competetive myself
i think these monopoly issues are getting as bad as political correctness now.
Last edited:
If i were to use itunes to manage my music, it would not hamper the functionality of my sony walkman in any way, shape or form. i cant see how that's anti-competetive myself
Proably because it is not. You would have to make every manufacturer of music players include software that interfaced with every other device if you wanted to make apple do it.
Why should apple allow any other music player to interface? I am open to reasons I have missed but I cant see any.
In this case, I can see why they've done it. Palm were a bit cheeky and did this without Apple's consent as far as I know. Being almost a direct competitor to the iPhone it's not surprising they acted quite quickly.
Just use Mediamonkey or something if you have a Pre, it's only the music that gets sync'd. Besides, Palm's got Amazon music store integration in the phone anyway so it just means lost sales.
I don't really like Apple as a company to be frank, just come across as smug in their Keynotes etc. But then they have the right to keep their software for their devices, no matter how horrible it is.
Saying that, I think the EU was unfair on Microsoft too for the IE case (for example, how on earth would the average user download another browser without it...?)
Just use Mediamonkey or something if you have a Pre, it's only the music that gets sync'd. Besides, Palm's got Amazon music store integration in the phone anyway so it just means lost sales.
I don't really like Apple as a company to be frank, just come across as smug in their Keynotes etc. But then they have the right to keep their software for their devices, no matter how horrible it is.
Saying that, I think the EU was unfair on Microsoft too for the IE case (for example, how on earth would the average user download another browser without it...?)
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
agreed. The only way i can see apple doing that, is some sort of open-standard for a software interface between music players and devices. That way any software that complies, should in theory be compatible with every device that complies.
Chances of that happening are slim though, i wont lie
Chances of that happening are slim though, i wont lie
This is probably the biggest problem with the ruling. As I said earlier no doubt vendors (dell, hp etc) will include firefox or another browser. If you're buying a boxed copy of windows, I'd argue that you're pretty savvy with computers and can probably achieve this somehow.
MTP was designed for this but that wasn't too well received...
EDIT: JonB, I think you're agreeing with me but still, being savvy enough to install Windows doesn't mean it's not a pointless inconvenience. Which seems to be the only thing that comes from the EU (pointless inconveniences that is)!
Last edited:
ignoring DRM issues and anythign else for a moment, all this boils down to is that apple dont want people syncing other devices to itunes. If i were to use itunes to manage my music, it would not hamper the functionality of my sony walkman in any way, shape or form. i cant see how that's anti-competetive myself
It's (possibly) anti-competitive because Apple are using their market dominance in one marketplace (downloads) to gain an unfair advantage in another marketplace (personal music players). There's no technical reason why iTunes can't be used to manage music on other players, just like there was no technical reason why IE couldn't be de-integrated from the OS
Tbf to Apple they could quite rightly argue that their personal music players are the strongest on the market, the EU may or may not accept that argument. It's up to the lawyers.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
It's (possibly) anti-competitive because Apple are using their market dominance in one marketplace (downloads) to gain an unfair advantage in another marketplace (personal music players). There's no technical reason why iTunes can't be used to manage music on other players, just like there was no technical reason why IE couldn't be de-integrated from the OS
yeah, perhaps. though i still dont agree that because its technically possible, it should be done. thats like saying its technically possible to connect a ps3 to the xbox live network and play xbox games.
Yeah the ruling may seem stupid, but in truth there were many other things involved with it. It wasn't as simple as anti-competitive behaviour.. I don't really know enough about it anyway.
Don't forget that iTunes is free and doesn't come bundled with windows or OS X. It's also not the only way to listen to music. (By bundled I mean un-installable, sure its installed by default on OS X but not bundled - you can fully un-install it.)
The EU could argue that apple have to open up their music marketplace, like provide an API for purchasing music, but I can't ever see them forcing apple to allow other music players to sync with iTunes.
Last edited:
it's quite simple, not supporting other devices is absolutely fine, deliberately blocking other devices with an update after the fact is dodgy in my mind. Like it or not, iTunes and the iTunes store have a de factro monopoly with online purchase and music syncing.
They don't have a monopoly though. They're dominant in the market, but that's not the same thing. There are other places which sell music - Amazon springs to mind. There are also many ways that various mp3 players sync music. I use rsync myself, because my mp3 player presents itself as a sensible filesystem.
I think there's dodgy ground because they are deliberately locking out competitor's products in a different market. Ethically, that may be wrong, but it's not monopoly abuse because (a) they don't have a monopoly in either market and (b) this practice isn't done to encourage ipod sales. Apple are all about controlling the experience, and allowing other players to sync with itunes affects their brand and image. They're not trying to suppress rival players, they're just protecting the brand.
Is it anti-competitive? Probably. I'd argue that whenever any vendor engages in some sort of lock-in, it's anti-competitive though. Doesn't automatically follow that it's illegal.
Surely part of the problem is that the Palm Pre pretended to be an iPod. I really can't blame Apple for blocking a device that pretends to be something else in order to work. It's pretty sneaky on the part of Palm really.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,378
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
Then Microsoft certainly aren't a monopoly, but are dominant.
Worth pointing out that the commission didn't actually make MS remove IE from Windows; Microsoft decided to preempt them and do it anyway.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,378
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
Face BILLION dollar fines or preempt? I know what I'd do.
Consigliere
- Joined
- 12 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 151,030
- Location
- SW17
Source?
agreed. The only way i can see apple doing that, is some sort of open-standard for a software interface between music players and devices. That way any software that complies, should in theory be compatible with every device that complies.
Chances of that happening are slim though, i wont lie
You mean a bit like WMP?
WMP has taken every device I have thrown at it (both mp3 players and USB sticks), however I doubt it would work with iPods as they aren't drag and drop compatible.
While we are on that subject, why do Apple insist on not allowing drag and drop on their players? Every other manufacturer seems to be capable of allowing it. The synic in me believes it's all to do with profit. If you didn't have to use iTunes to stick music on you wouldn't install it, and if you don't install it you won't buy and download with iTunes...