What exactly is Apple doing to stop anyone from creating an MP3 player, store and desktop software? Why are other companies entitled to access iTunes? Is it Apple's fault that the Zune isn't more successful?
I find the attitude displayed in this article to be disgusting. There are many things that I'd like to see changed. I have no right to demand that private companies do what I want. I do have the option of not buying their products.
In addition, the average person that uses Apple's products simply doesn't give a shit about any of this. The numerous non-geeks I know that own Apple products never mention any of these issues.
In addition, the average person that uses Apple's products simply doesn't give a shit about any of this. The numerous non-geeks I know that own Apple products never mention any of these issues.
I don't see how this is relevant at all. Most people in America don't give a shit about Medicaid (e.g.). Does that mean we should just put up with whatever mismanagement occurs? Should we tell people who do feel like taking a stand and demanding more from Medicaid to sit down and stop whining?
I know that Medicaid is publicly funded so the comparison breaks down a bit, but all purchasers of Apple products are its "funders" and I think they have a right to demand more. Who cares if non-geeks aren't aware of these issues? Those are exactly the kinds of consumers that need those of us who are familiar with the issues to stand up for them. They aren't aware that they aren't being given a choice (perhaps because they can choose one of several fart apps on the iphone).
My point is, most people are very happy with their Apple products and simply don't care about these issues. A small number of us would like to see these things changed, but are generally happy with the products we use. Then there is a small group of people, mostly geeks, who feel entitled to everything exactly as they want it.
Your analogy is ridiculous. If you don't like Apple products don't buy them. There is no category of product where Apple is the only choice. Apple doesn't even have a large share of the mobile phone market, making the iPhone argument even more pathetic.
Your point is well taken. To be sure I don't own any Apple products so I'm not really complaining. I just think that if knowledgeable people don't demand more then nothing changes. And the complacency of 90% of a product's users doesn't really imply that the product isn't flawed, especially if the product's technology is complicated or the users are particularly lazy. Not that those two things are necessarily true in this case, i'm just saying...
I don't necessarily disagree with you, but here is why other companies are entitled to access iTunes:
Think back to the Windows and IE antitrust legal battles. iTunes is similar to the Windows monopoly. It's the biggest platform for buying music online. According to antitrust laws, it is illegal for Apple to leverage that monopoly against competitors.
That said, Apple made a big investment into the whole iTunes infrastructure and has put a ton of work into negotiating with record labels to get all that music in the store. They did all that for basically no direct reward; they make almost no money off iTunes. They did it to support their iPod business. It seems a little unfair for other MP3 player manufacturers to expect all the benefits of using that infrastructure without the investment. The $1-$5 per device that the article suggests is not nearly enough. Apple makes hundreds of dollars off each device they sell which use the iTunes music store.
There's a lot of confusion about how US anti-trust law works. Leveraging a monopoly, or being a monopoly, is not illegal. The legality part is how you choose to leverage it.
It would be illegal if Apple bought Creative and ceased production of Creative's MP3 players
It would be illegal if Apple refused to reach an agreement with a record label to sell music via iTunes because the record label also sold music on a competing service.
It would be illegal for Apple to code iTunes to look for its competitors software and uninstall them.
It would be illegal if Apple reached a deal with Microsoft and Creative to not price any MP3 player under $100.
From a legal standpoint the illegal behavior has to be provable. What really got Microsoft in trouble was the assortment of documents & memos outlining their anti-competitive strategies more so than the acts themselves.
The iTunes music store is emphatically not a monopoly anymore. Those days really didn't last long, and are completely over at this point. I personally haven't used it in years, because Amazon and eMusic both blow it out of the water as far as I'm concerned, and the impact of making that switch has been zero. High marketshare != monopoly.
I, too, agree — but with the caveat that we're discussing this 'according to the antitrust laws.'
Moving back to consider the antitrust laws themselves, though, is important and I think you bring up a great point about how Apple invested significantly into the iTunes infrastructure, and allowing competitors to piggy-back on it is dubious at best. It's like a bankrupt railroad being allowed to use their competitor's track free of charge, simply by virtue of the fact that they have gone bankrupt and therefore should be afforded some sort of perversely 'level' playing field on which to compete.
I similarly think the antitrust case against Microsoft was dubious. As a web developer like many of you, I certainly scorned them for the anguish they caused me by bundling IE with Windows and thus shoe-horning it into the position of dominant browser. But I can't say I feel they shouldn't have been allowed to do that, even if it gave them an 'unfair' advantage over Netscape. Ostensibly, including a browser in the OS certainly made it easier for the average user to get on the Web.
I find the attitude displayed in this article to be disgusting. There are many things that I'd like to see changed. I have no right to demand that private companies do what I want. I do have the option of not buying their products.
In addition, the average person that uses Apple's products simply doesn't give a shit about any of this. The numerous non-geeks I know that own Apple products never mention any of these issues.