Microsoft Developing iPod, iTMS Competitor 304
Software writes "Reuters reports that Microsoft is developing an iPod and iTunes Music Store competitor. Few details are available, but it's known that Robbie Bach (the man behind the Xbox) is heading up the project." From the article: "Most iTunes rivals charge monthly fees to access a catalog of entertainment, but some allow consumers to buy individual songs for about $1 each. Microsoft's service will emphasize the pay-per-download, or a la carte, model, the sources said. A subscription component will also be offered, according to early accounts of the planned service. One source, who has seen a demonstration of the service, said it was an improvement over iTunes."
Winning in this market will be easy... (Score:5, Funny)
It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:5, Interesting)
So if ms did support both the iPOD and their on Plays4Sure players, then i think they would stand a good chance to uprooting Apple. Especially considering they can run the store at a loss for years.
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:3, Informative)
They have a better chance of buying Apple than they do of finding proper support for iPods without breaking the law. Which is to say, no chance at all. Real tried it, look what happened.
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:3, Informative)
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:2)
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:5, Insightful)
But in the case of the iPod, they want to compete against it for the same reason Apple created it: to introduce people to the Macintosh. Apple doesn't turn much in the way of profit on iTMS; it's just there to drive people to the iPod. The iPod does turn a profit, a pretty good one, but more importantly it gets people used to the idea that Apple products just work.
The iPod has astonishing market share despite the presence of cheaper, better-equipped alternatives. If people jump from Windows to Mac on the strength of that, it jepoardizes Microsoft's market share. At this point they depend vigorously on being the default OS choice. Erode their market share a little, and you open the door to eroding it a lot, as people no longer have to buy a Wintel box just to keep on the same page with their friends.
There's also the fact that a big company can never stand still. Just producing revenue isn't enough; they have to produce more revenue. One way to do that is to diversify, especially if you can diversify and still leverage your products in other areas. MS can do that big time.
For example, if they have a new, stronger DRM scheme (based, say, on Palladium), they may be able to get record companies to give them a price break, or even sign up those companies who don't trust Apple's FairPlay to protect their property.
MS can leverage their OS control (to give their device a performance hack that Apple can't get). Maybe they can leverage the Xbox, perhaps a plug on the side of an Xbox for their music player, or being able to build a handheld game device leveraging both the Xbox and music player platforms.
I don't know what they've gamed out, but basically, MS will try all of it. The downside, of course, is losing focus: it's usually better to make 1 good product than 10 shoddy ones. That's less about technology and more about management. MS thinks it has good management. On that, we'll have to see: the slips in the Vista schedule don't speak well to that.
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:3, Interesting)
When comparing mp3 players based on memory size I have not seen players significantly cheaper than ipod except down at the 1/2 gig size. Things like iriver have included fm radio or ogg support or record features so they may be better but they come in at about the ipod price.
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:3, Funny)
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:4, Funny)
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:3, Informative)
And unlike Microsoft, Apple essentially CREATED this market and created their position in a legal manner. Apple doesn't have OS tying issues because 1) they're OS is not a monopoly and 2) iTunes runs on Windows as well.
Microsoft talks about choice -- but they offer only one choice -- Windows. They offer zero Mac support for any of their Windows media stuff.
At least Apple o
See also: why get into the browser market? (Score:5, Insightful)
Likewise "Search". There's quite a bit of revenue there, of course, but it wasn't until GMail, GTalk, GExcel (just kidding) popped up that MS really felt the heat from google's platform.
No, the iPod is not a platform. But OSX is, and if there isn't a microsofty competitor to the iPod then that little device's users are eventually going to discover that Macintoshes are -- as a whole -- quite a bit better than XP boxes. (Vista I set aside for the time being)
Just thinking aloud here.
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:3, Interesting)
No valid reason that you can think of.
Microsoft have spent the last 30 years making billions off the Windows Tax [wikipedia.org]. Virtually none of their product lines outside of their Windows & Office products have ever made them any money. Were Linux with Open Office to really take off for example they would find themselves in a great deal of trouble. MS exe
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:3, Insightful)
Other than the part about Bill and Gil sitting around having coffee and hashing out the details, you're almost right!
The details will never be widely known, but Apple let Microsof
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:5, Insightful)
One way MS could "support the iPod" would be to release their own, replacement, OS for it that incorporates support for PlaysForSure(tm). When you connect your iPod to Vista it would ask you if you would like to configure your iPod to use music from MSSuperMusicStore(tm), and would flash your iPod with their OS.
There are already replacement OSes for the iPod running Linux, it wouldn't be difficult for MS to make a WinCE-based OS that supported their DRM, etc. I don't know that Apple would have any chance or recourse then...
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:3, Funny)
I sure hope MS does that.
ARRRGH. (Score:3, Funny)
AAC to WMA converter? (Score:2)
Not that microsoft lock-in'd be any better, but what if Microsoft were to write a utility to seemlessly convert and/or copy your exisiting iTunes library from AAC (including DRM-AAC) to WMA?
That might work for Microsoft. Of course,
Re:AAC to WMA converter? (Score:5, Informative)
Not that microsoft lock-in'd be any better, but what if Microsoft were to write a utility to seemlessly convert and/or copy your exisiting iTunes library from AAC (including DRM-AAC) to WMA?
DRM laden AAC is no different form DRM laden WMA, except for the base file format. Each can exist in a form which has no DRM, but the people selling you the music, such as iTMS add it there. If you can remove the DRM appended onto the AAC file then it should play anywhere. Don't forget AAC ( Advanced Audo Coding) is the audio encoding format that is part of MP4, and the licensor is Dolby.
For a given bit rate AAC is actually superior to MP3. I have AACs encoded with iTunes (not iTMS) that play quite happily with Winamp. I won't tell you how to remove the DRM from AACs because I don't know how to, and should testify having as much issue with WMA in this form.
You blame Apple for Linux's inability to play AAC? (Score:3, Insightful)
MP3 is ISO MPEG 1 Layer 3
So because Linux can't play AAC, Apple is at fault? If Linux can't play MP3 files, is it also Apple's fault because Apple also provides you the option of encoding in MP3?
And iTunes originally did support multiple hardware because the iPod wasn't released until 2001, and iTunes is at least as old as 1999. Creative's Nomad did indeed work with iTunes, and it may still if it is a mass storage device, but I don't know anyone who has tried since the
Re:It'd have to be an unmicrosoft solution (Score:2)
iPods have a life of about 8-10 months. After that a new version of iPod comes out and makes the older ones un-cool and un-hip. There is no reason the iPod crowd won't upgrade their next iPod to a Microsoft product in the 8-10 months upgrade cycle.
Re:Winning in this market will be easy... (Score:2)
Or, they could mount a legal challenge [bloomberg.com] to gain access to Apple's DRM, so you could buy songs at the Microsoft store and put them on your iPod, or buy songs at iTunes and put them on your Microsoft player. And although I'm generally as anti-Microsoft as the next slashdotter, I'd have to take Microsof
Re:Winning in this market will be easy... (Score:2, Insightful)
Give it away.
Seriously, if the most environmentally unsound thing you do this week is throw away a CD, you're doing just fine.
one source ... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:one source ... (Score:3, Funny)
Unfortunately, there will be backwards compatibility issues with the product. While most songs should play on the devices, certain songs more than 30 years old may have problems. Rumors about the beta test suggest that the devices refuse to play ragtime, polka, and early acoustic blues.
Anyone know to clear coffee out of your nose? (Score:2)
"One source" [cough]Robbie Bach[/cough]", who has seen a demonstration of the service, said it was an improvement over iTunes."
I only barely avoided spewing coffee all over the keyboard. A shame I have no mod points.
Seriously, though. One source said it was "better." Using what criteria? Did this source see actual hardware working with actual software?
Vaporous (Score:4, Insightful)
!!?
<grrr
Re:Vaporous (Score:2)
Re:Vaporous (Score:2)
Re:Vaporous (Score:2)
Re:Vaporous (Score:4, Insightful)
They're quickly becoming the Jack of all trades, master of none.
Re:Vaporous (Score:3, Funny)
They are a security company.
You can tell by all the security patches they write...
Re:Vaporous (Score:3, Insightful)
Hell, look at google. They became massively successful because they were great at what they did ( search and advertising ). Now what are they doing? Lets see... getting into the email space ( gmail ), buying up calendaring software, mapping software ( Google earth ), Flikr like graphics companies ( Picasso ). On top of that, buying up dark fibre for dog knows why, as of yet. Plus they seem to be trying to push their way into
Precisely (Score:2)
I've made a habit of ignoring any vapourware announcements from Microsoft like this one. They really are worthless. No dates for anything, no estimates, not even a name yet!
Bach (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bach (Score:2)
Hmm... (Score:3, Funny)
Gee, I wonder if that source was an Apple rep.
OK... but why (Score:5, Insightful)
Does anyone seriously disagree with me that Windows Media Player is a bloated piece of shit? Ever since like.. version... 6.4? MS has been trying to add every possible little thing to it... they are trying to make it so that it is the ONLY program you will ever need to run on your PC... personally I am all for decentralization but I realise there are some users who want to open up one program and then start typing an e-mail and buy movie tickets within the same app (a few years off in WMP)...
Re:OK... but why (Score:2)
Re:OK... but why (Score:4, Informative)
Correct. They (MS) now endorse a 3rd-party plugin for Mac called Flip4Mac that makes a QuickTime wrapper for Windows Media content. It works.. ok.
Re:OK... but why (Score:2, Funny)
Re:OK... but why (Score:2, Informative)
They probably sponsor Flip4Mac to distribute it (it's not a QT wrapper, it's a codec) for free. However, Flip4Mac does not support all Windows Media content. Specifically, no protected content at all, and very spotty performance on high-bandwidth video. Furthermore, Flip4Mac is an even worse resource hog than WMP for Mac OS X was.
FFMPEG (Score:3, Interesting)
But ffpmeg (MPlayer/VLC) work much better. As more folks start using MPlayer/VLC to watch media, there will be less need for the WMV (and QuickTime) proprietary protocols.
So, they can ignore the Macintosh at their own peril.
Re:OK... but why (Score:4, Funny)
Isn't there a name for software that is intended to manage the various tasks that a user is performing on a computer..? I know there's a name for software like that...
Re:OK... but why (Score:2)
You mean like a browser?
Re:OK... but why (Score:5, Interesting)
See, Microsoft don't need you to give up your iPod. They do know how to play the long game. It took them a while to get Pocket PC somewhat right (then they broke it again, but that's another story), but they got there in the end. Moreover, they used the integration with Windows/Office as a selling point (WMP is on every Windows PC, you can see where that analogy leads).
Point is, they don't need this to be an instant success, they just need a foot in the door, the rest is down to time.
Re:OK... but why (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:OK... but why (Score:2)
Oh no, not again! (Score:4, Informative)
I agree about WMP being lousy... I've tried to use it do sync music with my small (256MB) mp3 player. It's incredibly frustrating to try and get your music ready to copy to the mp3 player. I never use WMP to transfer my music now, I just do it through Explorer, or on Linux, but then I don't have control over the overall order of music. It seems that music within a single folder gets played all together and in the intended order, but I don't know what order the folders will be played. On my sister's non-iPod mp3 player, she can't make the music play in the order she wants, even if she creates a playlist in WMP, and syncs based on that. I never used to understand why non-Apple products don't get as much attention as iPod/iTMS (it seems like a simple thing to copy music to an mp3 player, how bad could everyone be screwing it up?), but now that I have one of the non-Apple players, I can see what a frustrating experience it can be.
I'm not really expecting a brilliant turnaround in Microsoft's next attempt at doing the same thing, the same way, all over again... (what was Benjamin Franklin's definition of insanity, again?)
Re:OK... but why (Score:2)
I could already open up 1 program and start typing an e-mail and buy movie tickets within the same app - Firefox. I could also listen to music [pandora.com] and run calendar [google.com] and spreadsheets [google.com] and look at my pictures [flickr.com] and read news [slashdot.org]. Lots of people are trying to make it so that you only ever need one program to run on your
Re:OK... but why (Score:2)
Should there only be one way to do things?, should you be unable to type numerals in Word, since that's what Excel is for? what if an online radio station is playing a song from a soundtrack of a current movie, shouldn't you be able to click a few links to get tickets?
But I wouldn't w
Re:OK... but why (Score:2)
Re:OK... but why (Score:2)
Does anyone also disagree that iTunes on windows is also bloated? The video aspect of iTunes comes from Quicktime which is needs pro version to even play full screen. Plus, quicktime itself is bloated on windows as well. Plus, they even have to make it look like a Mac application in windows further making it slower.
Re:OK... but why (Score:2)
I think you mean adjective...
Finally! (Score:3, Funny)
The ipod killa.
Pop a 40 Steve, because Bill is about to pop a cap in your lickable bar of techno soap.
or
2. yawn, another ipod killer story.
Take your pick
XBox/360 integration? (Score:5, Interesting)
I would be shocked to find out that this isn't the route MS plans to take, the 360 being your entertainment-hub and all.
Re:XBox/360 integration? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:XBox/360 integration? (Score:5, Insightful)
Many Universities require you to own a PC these days. WHen I went to school 5 years ago, the percentage of people who didn't own their own PC or laptop was vanishingly small- under 10%. The computer labs were only used for special software (say a CAD program), alternative OSes (Unix), and people who wanted to check their email between classes.
I can't say I know anyone who doesn't have their own PC at home. And definitely noone who owns an Xbox but doesn't own a PC.
THey still have access to a PC. If mom and dad are going to buy them an MP3 player, they'll let them on for a few minutes to download music.
Thats utter bullshit. Even in the US where Xbox came in second, less than 10% of all Xbox owners ever logged into Xbox Live, by MS's own numbers. You read a fluff piece on the Xbox somewhere.
I'm trying to find more recent numbers, but 40% of households owned a PC in the US in 1998 with 76% ownership in urban middle class households. The telephone was only 93%. This is a decade later. The people who don't own a PC don't have it because they can't afford one. And they sure as hell aren't buying $50 a month internet access for a game console.
There is nobody who does not own even a shitty PC, yet owns an Xbox and is willing to pay $50 a month for internet access to play online with it. MS may have other ways it can push its service, but the market you think it can address just doesn't exist.
Re:XBox/360 integration? (Score:2)
Easy way to win... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Easy way to win... (Score:2)
I could have sworn that they already did this. (Score:2)
Innovation! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Innovation! (Score:2)
Won't work. (Score:4, Informative)
The odds of Microsoft successfully pulling this off successfully are practically zero. One of these key components are bound not to show up, so I imagine people will have a copy itunes installed on their machine along with whatever Microsoft has.
Whatever happened to Urge? (Score:2, Interesting)
Microsoft Business Plan (Score:3, Insightful)
-Charles
Re:Microsoft Business Plan (Score:3, Insightful)
'Is it just me, or does it look like ever since Steve Ballmer took over the reigns Microsoft's business plan can be summed up as "Whatever Google/Apple is doing, we're gonna compete with that."?'
It's a winning strategy, and has proven effective on all levels of the food chain. It's called scavenging. Example: lions use tremendous cunning and skill to trap and kill their prey. Some are injured or killed in the process, but the risk is worth it.
Hyenas, on the other hand, simply follow the lions.
Origami? Urge? MSN Music? Helllooo? (Score:5, Insightful)
sorry MS, not like old times (Score:2, Insightful)
It won't sell. (Score:5, Funny)
I thought they already had an iTMS competitor... (Score:3, Insightful)
This has to be... (Score:5, Interesting)
"They have been developing technologies that have really good music discovery and community," another source said. "iTunes is the 7-11 (of music stores). You don't hang out there."
They have got to be kidding. People spend hours sifting through iTMS. I know people who never close it!
iTMS is like Amazon, people just use it for basic music reference at this point. These people are on crack.
Re:This has to be... (Score:4, Funny)
To be fair, the Microsoft guy/gal is hardly going to say "iTunes is everything you'd ever want from an online music store and more. Ours is going to suck fetid Dingo's kidneys compared to it."
The Xpod (Score:3, Funny)
I can see it now - cheap, overhyped, and bsoding.
It can be done (Score:2, Funny)
In other news... (Score:5, Funny)
Microsoft will seek to promote synergy between their software and retail arms. "Using a complex algorithm, our exciting new operating system Vista will be able to learn all about its users tastes and habits, through analysis of their websurfing and other computer activities. We can then send our customers personalized circulars containing exciting and valuable coupons for the things they need to buy most. Plus, if they have a webcam connected to their computer, we will be able to store their likeness in our centralized database, and store greeters will be able to welcome them by name as they enter the store."....
(OK, enough of that.
the article is a troll (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft Developing iPod, iTMS Competitor (Score:2)
lol again?
Ah yes... (Score:3, Insightful)
If this takes any significant market share of iTunes / iPod, I will eat my hat. At the end of the day, it has to be more than 'an improvement' over iTunes - we all know how quickly Apple can roll out big changes to their products, and all it takes is one or two small updates to put Apple back on top IF do release a product which is better.. but (and lets be honest about this) I really doubt they will.
weird.. (Score:3, Insightful)
There ain't no money in it... Apple sells music at a loss to encourage sales of ipods.
The "wildly successful" xbox also sells at a loss (correct me if I'm mistaken).
So, unless they're determined to burn thru all their cash, what does this mean, if not a perpetuation of overpriced OS & apps to pay for the other stuff?
Microsoft Service (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember the major record producers originally had their own "stores". They charged a monthly fee, charged for downloading, and then your music couldn't be transfered to other devices and would expire after two or three months. For some strange reason, it wasn't very popular.
Remember that iTunes and the iPod came out before the ITMS. Apple used it as a demonstration on how popular an MP3 player could be, and how easy it was to copy songs from CDs and share them with friends. There was *no* DRM on the original iPods. Jobs turned around and negotiated the store. He insisted that they sell all music for the same price, that the music wouldn't expire, and that users would have some means of sharing it. In return, Apple created FairPlay which made the record executives a bit less nervious about selling electronically.
Apple also made ITMS "Mac Only" as a demonstration product. This way, the music executives could see how it might actually be good for the industry. Once they were satisfied about the security and sales, they allowed Apple to ship the Windows version of iTunes.
Apple recently again did battle against the record industry. Remember a few months ago that the industry wanted to do away with "one price" pricing? Apple insisted that 1). All music would be the same price, and 2). That it would remain under a dollar.
Does Apple do this because they love us? Nope, it's because Jobs has a clue of what people want, and has a vision how things should be done.
Microsoft will simply try to overload the player with features, then use its Windows monopoly to push it upon the market. All PCs will come with the software, and the service. If you put in a CD, the service will be the default way it will play. The Microsoft designed music players will be unhappy on any machine, but Windows, and will insist upon Windows Vista. They'll come up with the service specs, and will design, but not necessarily produce the system. They will put pressure upon their "business partners" to produce the players, and to bundle them with their PCs. You will get the Microsoft approved device and you will love it.
This is a bit old, but explains why Microsoft couldn't make an iPod: .
They don't stand a chance. (Score:5, Informative)
This should go over well... (Score:3, Insightful)
I'l sure they'll all understand that they were really just preparing a market for Microsoft, and will quietly close up shop. Certainly, none of these companies such as Creative Labs has ever shown any tendency to cause trouble or litigate. I'm sure they can all simply rely on the US Justice Department's oversight and Microsoft's honoring the DOJ settlement and consent decree to ensure that Microsoft won't try to extend it's monopoly here.
Mac fanboys: "fud" does not mean "I disagree" (OT) (Score:5, Insightful)
Obviously there are probably better examples of FUD (U and D in particular overlap somewhat).
This is rather like the lamentable practice that some losers have of abusing the moderation system to bury posts they disagree with. Troll and Flamebait do not mean I disagree, nor does Overrated. When you disagree with a post or a story, the proper response is to REPLY. Let's face it, the reason we all come to Slashdot is for the comments. The days when Slashdot was the place to get current news are long gone -- there are a host of other sites that post this stuff days earlier, fail to dupe, and care about accuracy more than sensationalism. The reason that I don't read these much (and my guess is that it's the same for 90% of the rest of Slashdot) is because regardless of how many spelling mistakes there are in the story submission here, the comments are filled with lucid and interesting analyses of anything and everything.
I guess what this means is that you have a choice: you can either be a coward and use loaded tags or abuse the Troll/Flaimbait mods to comment, or you can actually post content that will help keep Slashdot interesting and the Slashdot masses informed.
Despite what everyone says about "the hive mind" and "getting modded down for going against the grain", I personally have never experienced this phenomenon. Have you ever noticed that nearly every lucidly written post that goes against established mantras and includes the magic line "I'll probably be modded down for this" makes it to +5? The whiners who go on and on about how "The Slashbots are against me!@@!!11one" usually can't write worth squat and such fail to inspire any reaction other than "You're stupid" from the Moderators. It's true that the reverse is not true, which is sad: some twat who clearly didn't pass elementary school English can write "M$ is the suxor! Lin0x is the win@!!" and get to +5 if he posts early enough, but despite this unfortunate reality the truth of the matter is that you can post wildly unpopular opinions and get modded up if you phrase your ideas in an interesting, informative, and non-flamebait way.
Since I'm going on about not abusing the tagging and moderation system, it's only appropriate that this be modded Offtopic, which it is. Mods, do your worst.
Re:Mac fanboys: "fud" does not mean "I disagree" ( (Score:3, Funny)
I noticed this as well. The sad thing is that they do get modded up when I would like to oblige them so much and mod them down for being inane or for trolling/pandering for shamelessly karma with that line.
But then, I'll probably get modded down for this.
Try moderating at -1 some time. :P (Score:3, Informative)
But I've seen well-written "against the grain" articles get modded down, and I've modded a few up again.
MS good for consumers (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:MS good for consumers (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple's approach is to not announce anything, let the speculation build, and then surprise people, usually with a great, well thought out product. Almost every time they release a product it has at least one feature that no one saw coming. Microsoft's approach is FUD, rushing products to market despite issues, and using their monopoly power to try to create other monopolies. Having a long run approach with an inferior product means you have to be cheaper and you have to be considered "good enough." They pulled it off with the computer because it's a big expensive purchase. It won't work with a $150 portable music device.
The first customer support call... (Score:3, Funny)
MS Support: You have to install Windows in your car to play CDs from the Mircrosoft Song Service.
MS Support: Give us your license number so we can make sure your not a thief.
Customer: WTF?
Enjoy,
Just so long.... (Score:3, Funny)
like iPods.
Reality Distortion Field (Score:3, Insightful)
This is just one more example of MS swallowing their own hype. They think they are good at what they do but they're not - they are just aggressive, lucky and unpleasant and that's how they got to be top dog in one area for a short time. It can't and won't last. History shows that hubris rarely lasts long.
Re:Spelling police (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Antitrust and the Media Player ? (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, but does it matter? Bundling has worked and spoiled the marketplace. Take IM for example. A few years ago, it was ICQ, AIM. Other latecomers came, like Yahoo! and Google Talk but never seemed to have taken any marketshare. Another newcomer was MSN Messenger. One would think that ICQ/AIM would still be tops dogs. Not true, even not in Europe. For a while ICQ seemed to be most popular over here, but I worked at a school for a while and the only thing the students seemed to use was MSN, all with a hotmail.com address including Passport. I still both have an AIM and an ICQ account (I know they are technically the same), but strangely enough nobody ever seems to be online there anymore.
Media player? Same thing: none of these kids uses WinAmp, iTunes, Realplayer to play media. They all use our good old friend Windows Media Player. Myself I use "Media Player Classic", but that's just me. The thing is that the iPod will make it a tad bit more difficult. Alternatives do not seem to exist for them. Sure, I think the iPod will make it difficult to actually force WMP on people, but those that don't have an iPod will use and recognise WMP. If they brand it correctly (the hardware "replacing" the iPod), the brand recognition will work and they will sell devices.
I never have seen a WMP-less Windows installed anywhere. Even in Europe, we have lost...
Innovation... (Score:2)
I smell a potential anti-trust issue developing here. The DOJ missed the real important points. MS will abuse their position with developing services and products. Unbundling IE is nothing compared to how MS can screw people with new services.
Sneak photo of the msPod released (Score:4, Funny)
http://gallery.ilounge.com/ipod/displayimage.php?
A video has also been showing the box design:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeXAcwriid0&search
Re:innovative (Score:2, Interesting)
Exactly right (Score:2)
That is exactly the case. Only like you say it wasn't supposed to be Apple in control of the market.
Given that Apple is on the way to having similar control over video sold online the whole industry should be sweating bullets. The only way to de-throne Apple would be to drop DRM and go with an open format, which movie and music studios will never be intelligent enough to do.