Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Ask RealNetworks CEO Rob Glaser

Roblimo posted more than 10 years ago | from the raising-Steve-Jobs'-blood-pressure dept.

Media (Apple) 379

RealNetworks has always been more Linux-friendly than other streaming media purveyors, and is now moving closer to the open source camp with its Helix Community effort. More recently, Real has made a big media splash by selling downloadable tunes in an iPod-compatible format. Does any of this matter, considering that world + dog seems to be jumping on the downloadable multimedia bandwagon? Can Real once again become "the" streaming media leader? Will Real's 49 cent "limited time only" song download price force other music download vendors to cut their prices? We have no idea, but hopefully Rob Glaser does. He's promised to answer your questions personally (rather than have PR people speak for him). So ask whatever you like. We'll forward 10 of the highest-moderated questions to him by email and post his answers soon after he gets them back to us.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Apple Support (5, Interesting)

ack154 (591432) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178425)

Since RealNetworks is all for "compatibility" and getting their stuff to play on the iPod, when do they plan to offer support for Macintosh users in the Rhapsody music store?

Will Apple support LInux? Real has. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178595)

Or is the parent a troll ???

just buy a mac :-)

Re:Will Apple support LInux? Real has. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178647)

(Grand) Parent is not a troll. This parent is a troll. The grand parent is asking a relevant question to all of the media coverage of late. They want Apple to work with their stuff, but will not work with Apple's stuff.

Spin. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178731)

So what? Real pulled a fast one on Apple. Ha ha ha.
Real offers the world an alternate source for music to play on iPodz and the fanatics go ballistic. The astro-turfers arise zombie like from their apple discussion boards and attack other sites chanting "Steve is God".

Real has no incentive to port to Apple: Apple heads worship Apple products and even if it was a better product, Applists would boycott it. A better is "will they strive to keep support for Linux up to date?"

Re:Apple Support (5, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178884)

If I can add:

Since RealNetworks objects to Apple constraining use of their proprietary formats, when does RealNetworks plan to set an example by opening up all of their file formats for free use and modification by other competing companies?

What's it like (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178427)

To have so many people hate your company/product? And I mean really hate, with a fiery passion?

When the line between troll and insightful blurs (5, Insightful)

Mr Guy (547690) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178529)

Boy, this question is really flirting with the line. Real has become one of those companies that geeks put in the catagory of "wouldn't piss on if they were on fire". How are they trying to fix those mistakes? Cutting the price isn't enough when people feel tainted for even using your product.

I think the moderator meant 'Inciteful' (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178902)

As in incite [reference.com] . Simple error, anyone could make it, really.

Re:What's it like (2, Interesting)

flewp (458359) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178697)

And also, how do you feel regarding RealAlternative for MPC?

Also, how do you really plan on setting yourself apart and being more linux-USER friendly? Most, if not all people who use linux I know also use Real Alternative for MPC on their Windows machines/partitions as opposed to the actual Real Player.

Re:What's it like (1)

cjpez (148000) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178890)

Also, how do you really plan on setting yourself apart and being more linux-USER friendly?
Apparently I'm playing the role of Real advocate today. Regardless, have you tried out RealPlayer 10?

It still comes down to price, for a lot of us (5, Interesting)

erick99 (743982) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178430)

How much wiggle room is there in the pricing of the songs? Forty-nine cents a song has made me a customer of Real's for now ( I haven't tried any .99 cent services - don't want to pay that much). I know it's unlikely that music can be sold that inexpensively but we know it doesn't have to be .99 since WalMart is doing .88. So, I am wondering what RealNetworks' pricing strategy will be. While I understand you cannot differentiate on price alone, the rest isn't going to matter if the price is .99. I just won't buy at that price (yes, obviously others will, but I maintain that multiples more will at a sustained, lower price).

Cheers,

Erick

Re:It still comes down to price, for a lot of us (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178485)

Yup, 99 cents is WAY to much. I mean, that is all of three minutes of work for a middle class person such as myself.

Re:It still comes down to price, for a lot of us (1)

rokzy (687636) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178628)

since most songs are ~3 minutes long they should call it even and let you have it for free

Re:It still comes down to price, for a lot of us (1)

flewp (458359) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178720)

With today's music, listening to a 3 minute song can be just as bad as 3 minutes of working...

Re:It still comes down to price, for a lot of us (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178742)

I mean, that is all of three minutes of work for a middle class person such as myself.

Right. Because that's how the real world works eh?

[Friday afternoon at the office]... Hmm cool, the 40 hours I've put in this week should cover my rent, food, utilities and beer money. Perfect... Oh look, here's a couple of songs I'd like to buy, "Boss, can I work an extra 6 minutes so I get paid an extra $2, excuse me $1.98, and buy two songs?"... Oops, my cell phone's broken, "Boss, can I work another extra hour so I can repair my cellphone for $19.99?"... Oh and I should ask out that chick... "Boss..."

Here's some news for those who just came down from fairyland: in this world, most of us get a fixed amount of income and we need to divide this among all our spendings, the more we spend on songs the less we have left to spend on other stuff. We can't just put in more hours on a whim to cover our growing expenses.

Re:It still comes down to price, for a lot of us (0, Flamebait)

wo1verin3 (473094) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178807)

Here's some news for those who just came down from fairyland: in this world, most of us get a fixed amount of income and we need to divide this among all our spendings, the more we spend on songs the less we have left to spend on other stuff. We can't just put in more hours on a whim to cover our growing expenses.

Ah thats true. In fact, I really wanted the new Dodge Viper but I couldn't put in the extra hours at work to cover it so I just stole it. If anyone catches me I'll just explain that I deserved it because I'm a good person and that my fixed incoming didn't leave me enough to pay for the car, let alone an oil change.

Re:It still comes down to price, for a lot of us (1)

rokzy (687636) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178848)

I calculated that after bills, a single song is worth under an hour of me existing.

so I could buy 24 a day every day. but beer is better.

Re:It still comes down to price, for a lot of us (4, Insightful)

2MuchC0ffeeMan (201987) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178684)

yeah, i think we should go back to the $17.99 standard for cds at the music store, for the 12 track album.... that's much cheaper!

exspecially for those albums that only have one or two good songs that you listen to over and over.

Re:It still comes down to price, for a lot of us (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178881)

Well, 10 years ago I used to buy similar albums on vinyl for $7, $6-5 on sale. Granted, some people would re-buy vinyls more since they were more fragile, but not enough to justify the doubling in price. And I imagine it's much less expensive to store and distribute CDs... So why are CDs so much more? Even at $1 per song (sorry I don't go for this .99 crap), that's still more than their average cost during the vinyl age, and the downloaded song doesn't need anywhere as much packaging cost. So what gives?

Re:It still comes down to price, for a lot of us (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178693)

Made you a customer? My God, has everyone forgot about the bullshit this company has caused in the past? Oh, that's right, they embraced open source, they can do no wrong... am I the only one around here who gives a shit about the rules? MARK IT ZERO!

It's a league game, Smokey.

Re:It still comes down to price, for a lot of us (2, Informative)

nolife (233813) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178920)

Real's price is $0.79 per song through Rhapsody. Of course it is $10/month subscription also but includes unlimited streaming of the songs of your choice. I suppose one subsidizes the others but depending on the percentage you do of each streaming and burning, it could be better or worse then a flat $0.99 a track. My kids and I use the streaming portion a LOT so I feel the $10 is well spent even without ever actually using the download for $0.79 option. YMMV

QUESTION (1)

herbert_axelrod (554087) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178433)

Why does real player generally suck and crash all the time? kthx!

Does he... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178436)

...first post?

dogs. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178437)

This "early post" is brought to you by the ECFA (Euthanasia for Canus Familirous Association). We are an organization dedicated to the eradication of dogs. ECFA (Euthanasia for Canus Familirous Association) is committed to protect our oxygen, to clean our streets, and to curb noise pollution - through the simple eradication of canine pests.

We have recently "connected" with the GNAA to form one ECFA. Stay connected. Please note that since we are moving to a larger demographic (the untold scores of people who deal with dog messes, noises, and annoyances daily), most of the current GNAA content is offline. In fact, we're pulling all of it except the "early post", which is now a ECFA-style "early post". The traditional GNAA "early post" will continue to be posted on all SCO stories, as insisted by upper GNAA management and its core team of fans. The illicit images and language will not be a part of the new combined organiztion. We do not condone any sexual lifestyle or race.

Have you ever stepped in DOG DOO-DOO [k9treat.com]

Are you MAD? [apa.org]

Do you KILL DOGS? [aapn.org]

Are you a MAD DOG KILLER? [k911emergencies.com]

If you answered "YES" to any of the above questions the ECFA (Euthanasia for Canus Familirous Association) is for you! You no longer need change your skin color or sexual lifestyle in order to become a member of an "EVIL TROLLING ORGANIZATION." Instead, you can work toward the noble of goal of INCREASING OUR SUPPLY OF O2! OVERPOPULATION of DOGS is RAPANT in this country. Did you know that DOGS turn BENEFICIAL O2 into CO2 simply to gain their energy to bark, drool, and howl? They ACTUALLY BURN OUR OXYGEN SUPPLY!!! One dog easily waste the Oxygen output of ten mature trees! This country has MANY UNWANTED, ABANDONED DOGS that WE ARE PAYING MONEY TO KEEP ALIVE. We are FEEDING them our food supply while making the homeless STARVE! Are you TIRED of having your TAXES increased? Humane Societies cost our country over $100 million annually. By using a Dog Killing Gadget, a dog can be turned into beneficial food, helping us all. We let children go hungry yet feed our **UNWANTED** dogs like royalty.

One dog can output over 10 lbs of droppings daily. One dog can aggrivate the allergies of untold numbers of people with its fast growing hair and all too common dandruff. Do you own a dog? Are you tired of its mess? Don't feel like planting ten trees and waiting 10 years for them to reach maturity? Then get it euthanized. Euthanasia is a painless way for a dog to... terminate. However, it can be too expensive to buy these drugs for the LARGE NUMBER of DOGS in the HUMANE SOCIETIES. It is thus proposed that these dogs be turned into food for the homeless. One dog can feed up to five homeless children for one day.

Many have wondered the best way to exterminate dogs. Euthanasia is by far the most clean method, but it taints the meat and is cost prohibitive. Thus, the most economical method is our K9Zap product featured on TechTV ($29.95), which deals a fatal shock to a dog up to 60lbs. Alternatively, the slightly messier bakers chocolate approach costs only about $0.30 per pound of dog. For more information, reply to this message or contact Gadgets for the Elimination of Dogs (GED). A rifle also works wonders, but may be against local codes, and is generally best to avoid in dog elimination.

WANT TO SUPPORT THE ECFA? Simply participate in our propaganda campaign to exterminate dogs. You can become a member of our slashdot trolling team, our usenet trolling team, or you can be a member of our local campaigning - by simply handing out brocures or posting signs outside humaine socities. If you have MOD POINTS, alternatively you can moderate this post UP to support our cause.

The question I'd like to see. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178442)

"Considering Real's brand has been so badly trashed by being 'that obnoxious spyware' company for so long; and your name is closely associated with it -- have you ever considered changing the name and resigning so the company can start focusing on the positives?"

wow (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178445)

Geek girls are HOT [linux-babes.info]

MOD PARENT DOWN HOT PORN LINK (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178614)

slashdot is no place for such arousing and fappable material, children view this site for fucks sake!

RealPod (5, Funny)

Solder Fumes (797270) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178469)

If Apple continues to make a

Buffering....

Buffering....

fuss about this, does Real have any plans

Buffering....

Buffering....

to develop a competing portable music player?

Re:RealPod (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178501)

Buff(gg)er off. Buffering jokes are not funny.

Re:RealPod (1)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178531)

Oh yeah... tell that to the person trying to listen

[Buffering...]

interoperability (5, Insightful)

Refrag (145266) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178471)

Rob, why doesn't Real drop all the pretense of desiring to have an interoperable solution with the Ipod and actually use one for their downloads site? The Ipod supports a few standard file formats and one DRM encumbered one. If Real were really about customer choice, they'd sell non DRM encumbered files and then be able to shout from a mountain that their music works with the Ipod as well as almost every other digital media player.

Re:interoperability (3, Insightful)

Otter (3800) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178633)

This is an excellent question, but if I may take a shot at the answer -- major labels simply aren't going to license their music in straight MP3 (or Ogg Vorbis or whathaveyou) format. Opting for DRM-free tracks basically limits you to being MP3.com II.

Re:interoperability (1)

tdvaughan (582870) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178639)

That would be if they could convince the record companies to offer their music without DRM, of course. Even Apple couldn't pull that one off.

Re:interoperability (4, Insightful)

Wildfire Darkstar (208356) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178682)

Yeah, because then Real's music store will leap to the head of the online music market with its impressive collection of public domain jingles and amateur-recorded classical music.

How on earth is this post insightful? Even if we assume that Real was willing to use an unencumbered format, then what about the actual copyright holders, like the RIAA, who have made very clear that this sort of thing would be totally unacceptable? By the same token, why doesn't Apple sell unencumbered MP3s (or AACs, or whatever your particular poison is in this case) so that Linux users can play them without the hassle of messing around with Wine?

Let's keep some perspective on this whole thing, folks....

Evil. (-1, Troll)

ryane67 (768994) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178492)

RealNetworks is evil. There's a reason my company completely blocked real.com

I meant to ask... (-1)

ryane67 (768994) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178538)

Why is real so Evil? ...my bad.

I have a question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178497)

Can you please release a free .rm -> .avi converter. Please!

Media formats and proprietary control. (5, Insightful)

Performer Guy (69820) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178507)

Given the ongoing struggle for control of content distribution via proprietary formats, do you see any hope for more vendor neutral formats that don't tie customers to one particular 'technology'? It seems that constantly changing formats often have more to do with vendor lockin than genuine technological differentiation. What is Real doing to improve this situation and are other vendors likely to cooperate?

World + dog (1)

ChaoticLimbs (597275) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178532)

Okay, please leave out lame cliches like this when posting to slashdot. It makes me sad.

Re:World + dog (1)

ack154 (591432) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178591)

It makes you sad? How do you think the dog feels? I mean, he's just "+ dog" ... I'd be pretty pissed.

"Clean" Software - no Cruft? (5, Insightful)

adisakp (705706) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178536)

Why does Real player force you to install 100 things you don't need and place icons everywhere, add bloated background tasks / services, insert an item into the task tray, popup daily "real news", take over major formats, etc, when many people only use it to view videos that aren't in any other format? Why don't any of the major software companies offer a lean clean, cruft free version of their software? If REAL offered that, I'd pay for the minimal version before the expanded one!

MOD PARENT UP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178619)

Make him answer this one. Damn I fucking hate RealPlayer.

Re:"Clean" Software - no Cruft? (4, Informative)

cjpez (148000) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178680)

Er, they have. RealPlayer 10 for Linux [real.com] is a simple stripped-down client, and doesn't install anything else. I've had it installed for some time now.

Re:"Clean" Software - no Cruft? (1)

Spad (470073) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178923)

http://www.real.com/products/player/bbc.html [real.com]

Completely spyware free. Doesn't install any System Tray icons - in fact I can't find much wrong with it yet.

I wanted to watch the BBC Olympics coverage, so I took the risk of downloading it and it seems to have paid off.

Questions about Mercatur (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178543)

1. When was the first time you visited mercatur.net? [mercatur.net]

2. How many times in the past week have you masturbated to Mercatur?

3. How many times have you called up Mercatur where she works, pretended to be a customer, and masturbated by stroking your cock with a printout of her current cam image?

4. Do you think her being a rabid right-wing Republican makes her more attractive or less attractive?

5. When do you think she'll show us those fine titties [mercatur.net] on her webcam?

Spyware (5, Interesting)

mocular (635667) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178546)

Since RealNetworks has been documented as a purveyor of spyware both in the news and in the courts, why should we trust anything that your company does?

Will your company ever stop the spyware attacks on users of your products?

Why should we believe anything you say?

Re:Spyware (1)

2MuchC0ffeeMan (201987) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178569)

I wish we could ask all company CEOs this question.

Is HelixPlayer going to be tied to the Gnome HIG? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178553)

One of my biggest frustrations with the HelixPlayer as it stands today it its use of the Gnome HIG (Human Interface Guidelines). I don't care whether you use GTK2 or Qt, or what licensing you prefer, or anything like that. My question is this: using the toolkit you deem best, on the licensing terms you deem best, are you ever going to release a HelixPlayer for non-Gnome desktops? If not, do you see this lack of integration with many (perhaps most) Linux users' desktops as a liability? Are you counting on "community support" to add this feature, or would RealNetworks commit resources to it?

Goodwill (5, Interesting)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178558)

Real has gone from a company that I once recommended to being viewed as antagonistic with its customers. From webpages that misdirect people to the non-free Real player, to the ever bloated software, spyware etc. Now it seems as Real is going down the "me too" road, and instead of creating a product people search for, is just another pea in the iPod (sorry about the pun).

Why exactly would I look to Real for anything? What is better (other than price) about anything Real has to offer, compared to Apple, Microsoft, etc? What compelling reason do you offer for me to again look at Real?

Re:Goodwill (1)

LoudMusic (199347) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178762)

Real has gone from a company that I once recommended to being viewed as antagonistic with its customers.

Well, I don't know that I really ever recommended it to anyone in the first place, but I definitely dislike them more now than ever before.

Is it possible to issue a company a cease and desist order for their own benefit? (:

Re:Goodwill (1)

iCEBaLM (34905) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178925)

When streaming audio on the internet was in its infancy Real Player (or, Real Audio Player, as video playback wasn't even in the player) was a very good program, innovative, inventive, etc. I did recommend it.

Not anymore.

Obligatory (1, Funny)

Have Blue (616) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178572)

Just so we can move on to the serious questions, please put all "Buffering..." jokes below this post.

Response (1, Funny)

ajservo (708572) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178627)

Buffering... 38%

Buffering... 12%

Buffering... 24%

Helix (5, Interesting)

MikeMacK (788889) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178598)

What prompted the creation of the Helix community? Does Real see open source as a way to differentiate themselves from Apple and Microsoft, or where there other considerations?

What is he going to do about the player? (4, Interesting)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178607)

There is a question behind this:

As it is, RealPlayer is universally despised for several reasons, many of them valid. the few that grind me are:

1. It's more than one click away from the main website.

2. It tries to take over your system as a default media system and sign you up for all kinds of spam on install.

3. It's BUTT ugly. It looks like the rejects from the XP UI team were hired to design it, when the rejects from the QuickTime UI team would have been a better choice.

4. I can't DL the content of RealMedia, like I can with mpeg or quickTime.

5. It's a bit [buffering 10%] too eager [buffering 25%] to send media [buffering 40%] before it's [buffering 75%] ready. And scrubbing [buffering 85%] is nearly [buffering 95%] impossible.

Fix these problems, and people might take Real Seriously. So the question is:

WHEN are you going to fix these OBVIOUS deficiencies that have plagued the player for YEARS?

RS

Re:What is he going to do about the player? (4, Informative)

cjpez (148000) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178815)

1. It's more than one click away from the main website.
How many clicks does it take for you to click "Download" on www.real.com [real.com] ?
2. It tries to take over your system as a default media system and sign you up for all kinds of spam on install.
The RealPlayer available by clicking on that link I mentioned does none of these things. (Though I admit I haven't installed the Windows version)
3. It's BUTT ugly. It looks like the rejects from the XP UI team were hired to design it, when the rejects from the QuickTime UI team would have been a better choice.
Since you're obviously not familiar with what's been happening recently at Real, I should point out that the RealPlayer available at said link uses a different GUI than the previous versions.
4. I can't DL the content of RealMedia, like I can with mpeg or quickTime.
This is still true, of course.
5. It's a bit [buffering 10%] too eager [buffering 25%] to send media [buffering 40%] before it's [buffering 75%] ready. And scrubbing [buffering 85%] is nearly [buffering 95%] impossible.
I haven't had this problem on the new version, though I never really had any problems with it for the past few versions of RP either. I've just got a standard DSL line. Perhaps you've just got a sucky connection.
WHEN are you going to fix these OBVIOUS deficiencies that have plagued the player for YEARS?
When are you going to check to make sure you're not posting outdated information that's no longer true?

Re:What is he going to do about the player? (0)

chill (34294) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178926)

#1 has been fixed for some time. Big button on the site that says "Download RealPlayer FREE". Click it and it starts the download.

It is even smart enough to send me to http://linux.real.com if I'm browsing from a Linux box. Oh, yeah. One click download THERE, too.

#2 Doesn't really happen anymore, either. It is much less obnoxious and quite a simple install. Uncheck a couple boxes (and by "couple", I *do* mean 2) and click next. Just cancel the registration and that is that.

#3 is opinion. Real 10/Helixplayer is acceptable.

#4 True

#5 True

2 1/2 out of 5 isn't good enough to mod +5 insightful. Check out the latest player before criticizing.

Turnabout? (5, Interesting)

Elwood P Dowd (16933) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178608)

What would you do if the next version of Quicktime could play .rm files, even ones with DRM? Suppose that they respect the DRM, and only play on authorized computers. Suppose Quicktime Pro were capable of creating .rm files with DRM.

Why shouldn't Apple do this?

open keys for realmedia ? (4, Interesting)

johnjones (14274) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178609)

hi

could real allow people to create and sign their REAL media that they created at no cost ?

so allow people to create their own online stores rather than sign up to itunes or MSN

this way you just sell server software to ISP's and streaming people (profitable)

regards

John Jones

Why should I trust Real? (5, Interesting)

Progman3K (515744) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178610)

A long time ago, when Windows 3.1 was new, I appreciated RealPlayer for it's cutting edge technology and highly-optimized video/audio codecs.
But as time went on, Real became a company I distrusted due to their spyware-like behaviour and the fact they tried to hide options to disable said behaviour in their software.

It has gotten to the point where MANY computer users I know simply refuse to install ANY Real products on their computers anymore and even boycott web sites that offer content in Real-only format.

So, why should I trust your company now? How has any of that changed?

Thanks.

Disclaimer - The preceding may have resembled a flame or troll to those who cannot tell the difference between an honset question and a troll.

Re:Why should I trust Real? (3, Insightful)

cjpez (148000) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178859)

and the fact they tried to hide options to disable said behaviour in their software
What exactly was hidden? I remember some unpleasant behavior in older RealPlayer versions, but turning those behaviors off was never more than going into the options screen and knowing which tabs to click on.
How has any of that changed?
A fairly good argument to be made is that, in fact, RealPlayer 10 has addressed most of the issues present with older RP versions.

Legality of Harmony (5, Interesting)

halo1982 (679554) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178620)

Are you concerned at all that Apple might sue Real under the DMCA for basically hacking the iPod to allow compatibility between Real and the iPod? If Apple does do this, what measures are you taking to make sure that the files people buy from Rhapsody will continue to play on their iPod after Apple locks Harmony out using a firmware update or something similar, and would you offer refunds to people with iPods who purchased music on Rhapsody?

Hey Rob G... (5, Funny)

escher (3402) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178624)

Remember when you fired us all with no warning and stole all our stock options through a technicality?

That sucked.

Re:Hey Rob G... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178885)

I think this would be a good one - perhaps even better than the spyware questions people are asking. It's a pattern and a corporate culture of not caring that Real emboddies; and when they recognised the bad PR around spyware they pretty much whitewashed over that issue.

Asking the not-too-obvious but deeply related issue of a company that doesn't give a f*ck about people might get a more honest answer because he doesn't have PR handlers coaching him on this point.

An very importatnt question: Why... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178640)

<bufferring>

FairPlay licensing (5, Interesting)

d_jedi (773213) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178643)

Why was Real unable to license the FairPlay technology from Apple? Did Apple simply refuse, or were their terms unworkable?

the most important question (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178649)

Why do Real products suck shit?

Nice, but.... (5, Interesting)

dacarr (562277) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178652)

While I find it wonderful that Real has embraced Linux, your subsidiary, listen.com [listen.com] , seems antagonistic toward Linux, making it quite clear that they have no plans at this time to move their Rhapsody player to Linux. This tells me of a bit of a dichotomy in your company. Are there plans to resolve this?

Real Obnoxious (5, Interesting)

loteck (533317) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178655)

Why is Real so intrusive into the average windows system when using the express installation method? Why must the player install shortcuts on the desktop, in the start menu in several places, in the quicklaunch bar, in the favorites, etc., and why must it hijack my file associations? If i delete these shortcuts, why are they -ever- recreated by Real without asking me?

Why is the free version the hardest version to find on your website?

Why must I choose a custom install and play a game of "catch-em-all" to avoid some of these issues?

Why does Real assume I'm interested in news, updates, libraries, or any of the nonsense that it is configured for by your company?

In short, why does Real feel the need to be so Obnoxious? These are "real" questions posed by "real" users, like here [jogin.com] and supported by your own employees [jogin.com] !

Join MS/Apple/Sony/Napster/Walmart? (1)

NeverReminder (645621) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178686)

I'd seems to me very clear that with big players entering market competition will be too high to get profit/significant market share.
Does Real thinking to join resources with any other companies providing similar service?
MS, for example, was always big enemy of Real, but isn't time to forget and cooperate :)?
I think company on this market needs to have hardware backed support. Apple have it, Sony can have it, MS definitely have it. Real?

always? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178772)

Revisionist.

Microsoft used to own Real.

Strategy Question (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178691)

Strategically speaking, Real doesn't look to be in a very promising position. Its technology, once unique (RealAudio), is now ubiquitous. Its marketing has been, by any account of which I am aware, a disaster. Now it seems like there is no area in which Real has any real strength or over its competitors - RealMedia is eclipsed by Windows Media, iTunes rules the day in downloading and Microsoft is entering that market as well.

Rob, what advantages does Real bring to the table? What can Real do that no other company can do? Why does Real exist? What the hell are you doing?

What happens (1)

spidereyes (599443) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178700)

If other companies come down in price and either meet or beat Real won't that leave them trailing? How do they plan to compete with the others (especially in the future)?

How long have you been a socialist? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178730)

In previous interviews, Rob, you pledge you allegiance to the likes of Al (Stuart Smalley) Franken.

So, how long have you been a socialist? Are you living an "alternative lifestyle" or something? Do you really hate our military?

Parent is a troll (1)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178806)

obviously. give this idiot a -1. Now. If I had moderator points right now, I'd do it myself.

RS

Is Real really Linux friendly? (0)

diamondsw (685967) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178734)

Off-topic, but since when has Real been so friendly to Linux? Not trolling, I genuinely hadn't noticed that. I mean, if open source is the only criteria then QuickTime Streaming Server has been open source for years.

Tell us about the DRM stripping approach you took (3, Interesting)

adzoox (615327) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178735)

Many questions will center around this topic I'm sure, but hopefully I'm asking a unique question here:

In your PR for Harmony - you stated that this was a ground up software approach.

Was there ANY reverse engineering?

I also find it VERY hard to believe that you didn't borrow some code from HYMN to produce this software - will you emphatically and categorically deny any code borrowing or reverse engineering?

Lessons learned from astroturfing (5, Interesting)

michaeldouma (311409) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178737)

There's a lot of spin going on at Real's new Freedom of Music Choice [freedomofmusicchoice.org] site. Clearly, Real was not expecting such a profound and immediate [slashdot.org] backlash. It must be frustrating [slashdot.org] that Apple gets to be both an underdog and a monopoly at the same time. But despite the feel good claims [freedomofmusicchoice.org] on your Freedom site (did you really write those?), your price drop, reverse engineering, and activism are hardly riling up the public. What have you learned from this?

My question: (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178746)

"How do you sleep at night?"

Real products are bloat stuffed with ads (1)

formal_entity (778568) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178749)

Real products are bloat stuffed with ads, since when did people start paying attention to them? Did they give you money do this?

cat and mouse game ! (1)

phreakv6 (760152) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178755)

Harmony [realnetworks.com] !=FairPlay [apple.com]
apple could keep upgrading Fairplay [just like yahoo and msn keep upgrading their authentication scheme
of their IMs to keep away third-party IM's like gaim [sourceforge.net] and trillian [trillian.cc] ]...
would Harmony keep up with Fairplay just as well ?.

What is your business model? (1)

otis wildflower (4889) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178770)

I'm not trying to be facetious.

I presume it has something to do with charging for access to premium content, such as CNN, MLB, ESPN, etc. So you're in cooptition with AOL, VIACOM, etc. Once they figure out how to hook their streaming servers into LDAP (Darwin/QTSS) or Active Directory (whatever M$ junk there is) for authentication and access control, where are you when the contracts run out?

It also has something to do with both client software and server infraware. So you're competing with Apple (which owns the decade(s) old standard Quicktime) and Microsoft (which owns the desktop).

Your server software is crap compared to Apache + Darwin/QTSS in terms of scalability and security infrastructure (authentication and access control in RealServer is a nightmare). As much as I hate M$ software in general, they at least integrate their streaming junk AFAICR.

Your free client software is impossible to track down on your website, and the quality compared to MPEG4/3GPP? Questionable.

There's an awful lot of rocks and hard places you're caught between. How do you anticipate not being crushed?

Linux Movie support (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178776)

I like the idea of Real Movies and would love to be able to use it with my Gameshark Mediaplayer. When or will Real support Linux and other alternative platforms such as PS2/Gameshark Mediaplayer with it's Real Movies/Starz Ticket products?

REAL can ROT (1)

qwerty75 (775323) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178777)

Like many of you I too used Real in the begining. They had a good product and were one of the only players. Now the image of Real is horrible. One of my users asked me about Real and I informed him that I would do my best to FIRE any employee using Real Player at work.

So, what are you going to do to remedy all the hate people have for your company? Do you think that selling music for half the cost of others is enough for people to put up with your sub-par software?


Is is just me or did anyone else shed a tear when Winamp was devoured by AOL.

Mr. Glaser, just one more question... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178781)

Regarding your little PR war with Apple: Did you ever consider the stunning hypocrisy of your publicly complaining that Apple doesn't offer its users choice of online music stores, and then turning around and making a music store that only supports computers that run Windows?

Real Movies (5, Interesting)

prostoalex (308614) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178793)

How successful os the Real Movies partnership with Starz? I am a paid subscriber, and so far the service has been pretty impressive - I can download a 100 movies at any point, and 25 new ones are added each week. Are there any future plans for the Starz/Real partnership?

Will you offer the movies that currently play in movie theaters for additional fees? Will you offer the movies that just came out on DVDs?

Will you promote independent movies and if I work for an independent studio, how can we strike a partnership with Real Networks to distribute the content to your subscribers in some affordable way?

Hm. (1)

JNighthawk (769575) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178800)

Why do you think that by offering cheap downloads, people will want to use Real's bloatware? Real used to be the leading edge, along with Microsoft's sleek old version of Media Player. Will Real ever go back to the old days?

Are you going to stop beating your wife? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178816)

I await your reply.

legalities (3, Interesting)

jest3r (458429) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178836)

Mr. Glaser, What is your stance towards the reverse engineering of codecs and encryption schemes meant to create a glimmer of profitability in an industry plagued by pirates? What would you do if a competitor such as Microsoft reverse engineered the Real codec to turn a profit?

Helix to play RealAudio/Video (2, Interesting)

barcodez (580516) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178840)

Please open source these formats because I don't what to install a different mediaplayer for each format - it's boring.

First off (4, Interesting)

iamdrscience (541136) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178846)

While all the topics presented at the beginning of this thread are interesting, I think most slashdot users (and real users in general) are much more interested in the various foolish choices made in the design of the real player client. Why is the "express" installation so horribly unusable and why is it made so difficult to turn off all the various disruptive features of real player when you do a custom installation (i.e. setting it up so that it doesn't hijack all your file associations, make icons everywhere, etc.). I mean, come on, nobody wants to view JPEGs with real player and hardly anybody wants real player in their quicklaunch tray. Furthermore, since I know Real has addressed these issues in the past and promised a less hostile installer, what the heck is keeping you guys! And on a more aesthetic note, I think it was a silly choice to make real one use a non-standard window. It just looks stupid.

Chapter 11? When? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178854)

Real continues to lose money [yahoo.com] . you're running low on cash [yahoo.com] . How long can you last before the Apple/Microsoft juggernaut crushes you?

Should've been more like Burger King (1)

whoppers (307299) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178866)

When I order a whopper, I get it with the things I want and without the things I don't. They've never tried to sneak in anything I don't want and they've always been open and honest about where things are.

Real on the other hand (this is still Real folks, call em whatever you want, but they're still bad) sneaks in spyware that you didn't ask for when you install their "free" version, if you can find it on their website. They may argue that this is all legal, sure it is, they've hidden all these underhanded activities within their lame-assed long-assed terms of service.

Anytime since they went south of Hades with their business practices (1998 ?) I've asked everyone I've met that distributed content via the real format to try and install a clean free version similar to what their visitors/customers might do.

I don't recall any of them that didn't have an alternate format available within a few months.

All this in mind, will you peckerheads still treat everyone else this same way?

Not that I'd trust real again ever, kinda reminds me of a gal I met with crabs, sure it was fun at the time, but I sure paid later eh?

Ahem... (1)

notwittyenough! (811418) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178867)

Dear Mr. Glaser, If you could push a button knowing that simultaneously a person in another land you would never meet were to die and one million dollars were to be deposited in to you bank account of choice, would you do it?

Linux-compatible multimedia players (3, Insightful)

Goeland86 (741690) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178878)

Do you hope that at one point in time Real's position on open-source will encourage hardware manufacturers of portable music devices to port their drivers to linux (i.e. Dell's Jukebox) and use a Real program as a music library program? In other words does Real hope to push the linux perspective into the media market? As a linux user I feel a little left out of the hype because even though it's growing it doesn't seem like enough corporations bother to notice it.

My biggest question is this: (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178880)

(buffering)

Are you looking to sell Real? (2, Interesting)

QuatermassX (808146) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178887)

I would think that it will be impossible for you to compete with Microsoft and Apple in the long-term both regarding streaming media (MS will never let you own this) and music downloads (besides, I take it that Apple is MS's fig leaf of choice with the anti-trust people). Why will you survive and are you really just looking to sell the company to the highest bidder - e.g, MS or Apple?

My Question. (1)

radiumhahn (631215) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178895)

Do you regret putting spyware/adware on people's computers. How do you plan to regain our trust?

Open Source.. but why no HELIX on Windows? (4, Interesting)

CdBee (742846) | more than 10 years ago | (#10178908)

My question to Mr.Glaser is this: Real has made much of its Opensource initiatives, but why is it that the OSS Helix Player is not available for Windows?

Helix must build on Windows as its the basis for all your software, but Win32 users are forced to use the RealPlayer, which some may find undesirable... while other platforms have the option of Helix without proprietary codecs. Is this really choice ?

RealMovie? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10178931)

I've noticed that there have been a lot more movies in WMV format ever since Microsoft released the Windows Movie Maker (which, like iMovie, saves movies only in the company's format). Why dosn't Real do the same? I'd love to be able to play my friend's home movies on my Linux box with RealPlayer.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?