toggle

AAPL Stock: 132.65 ( + 2.37 )

toggle

Comments

  1. dave a

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    Monopoly - rubbish!

    "what is smart and legal for most companies, under law can retroactively be ruled monopolistic and illegal when a company is too successful." Well, that's clearly an ignorant, knee-jerk anti-government reference to Microsoft's monopoly suits. What that columnist is forgetting is that Microsoft very clearly broke the law, committed perjury multiple times, and used practices which are specifically called out as monopolistic. You don't get sued just for having majority share; you get sued for abusing your majority share to put others out of business. Otherwise there are lots of other businesses that would have been prosecuted. Apple's never used its leadership position with iTunes or the iPod to force others out of business...

  1. bfalchuk

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    Blah

    I don't think the success of the iPod can be attributed to locked out functionality, it is because it is just the best. People love how it looks and works, period. Same goes for the iTMS.

  1. mjpaci

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    KAPO - Another usage

    KAPO: Term used in the n*** concentration camps for a prisoner chosen by the SS to head a work gang made up of other prisoners

  1. JeffHarris

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    Idiotic Opinion Piece

    Comparing Apple/iPod/iTMS to Microsoft is downright idiotic.

    Apple sells a personal entertainment/file transfer device and offers a paid music download service which work together seamlessly. The iPod and iTMS support both Mac and Windows. It does not support some competing file formats: WMA, Ogg Vorbis, etc.

    Microsoft sells products which are widely acknowledged to be unstable, be security threats and are expensive to purchase, support and maintain. Their OS is deemed necessary by many.

    How Apple/iPod/iTMS even BEGIN to compare to a company which aggressively works to undermine and destroy competitors?

  1. mjpaci

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    Disregard my last comment

    I was googling KAPAO for a link to the article where I wouldn't have to register and typed in KAPO by accident and didn't proof. My apologies to anyone I may have offended.

    --mike

  1. mouseketter

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    He lost me at...

    His nonsense rambling lost me at 3/4 of the way though his editorial piece when he says Microsoft doesn't control the price of the Windows OS.

    huh?

    Saying Apple has a monopoly with the iPod is kind of like saying Sony had a monopoly on portable personal cassette players with the Walkman.

  1. Deal

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    Apple - Firefox

    A pc writers point of view. Apple is dying, Apple is dying, Apple is dying, Apple is dying, oh wait, Apple is doing well, Sue Apple, Sue Apple, Sue Apple, Sue Apple...

  1. Deal

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    prev post in firefox

    A pc writters pont of veiw. Aple is dieing, Aple is Dieing, Aple is Dieing,Aple is Dieing, oh wate, Aple is doing wel, Sew Aple, Sew Aple, Sew Aple, Sew Aple...

    Come on Firefox, Where's the SPELL CHECK!

  1. ArizonaJoe

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    Snobs

    ...are always aplenty on these lists. Now you're trying to rationalize the persecution of Microsoft for its success while rationalizing why Apple should be exempt from the very same antitrust persecution.

    The very same (unjust) legal theories and arguments that were used against Microsoft are a danger to Apple. If Apple is ever sued or otherwise persecuted, the thugs who do so will use those same theories. Whether you think MS products are bad and inferior, and that Apple's are good and superior, is irrelevant to this issue. Courts do not assess a product's worth - they assess its market share.

    I think the author is jumping the gun when he predicts suits in 2005. Apple will probably offer customers more flexibility long before anyone tries to sue them. Songs that you buy from ITMS are not very useful right now, and if Apple wants to make a real dent in the multi-billion dollar music market, they need to sell songs in a format people can use on devices other than iPods - and at higher bitrates.

    I also think we can safely expect the MSN Music store to eventually have 20% of the market. With ITMS at 60-70% share, I don't think the antitrust thugs will have a cause of action. I think it needs to be 90% or so for a long time for them to have an interest.

  1. ApeInTheShell

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    Boing!

    Apple is not using exclusionary tactics. They made it clear from the beginning that iTMS was created to sell the iPod.
    There are too many formats for the iPod to support. People want an easy way to load their music into their iPod.
    You can easily buy songs from other stores with a verified credit card. Except most of these stores no longer sell the MP3 format.

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

Advertisement

Recent Reviews

Apple 12-inch Retina MacBook

It is an exciting time for consumer technology, with gadgets and devices that once used to the stuff of dreams now coming to fruition. ...

JBL Synchros Reflect in-ear headphones

All headphones are not created equally, especially when it comes to use during vigorous activities or workouts. Over-the-ear headphone ...

Bracketron Power Flex external battery

When we're traveling or just generally out and about, we've taken to bringing a tablet and Bluetooth keyboard with us, rather than a ...

toggle

Most Commented