Posted by William Davis on 10/20/05 03:48

In article <dj3rn0$hii$1@mughi.cs.ubc.ca>,
davem@cs.ubc.ca (Dave Martindale) wrote:

> William Davis <davisbill@mac.com> writes:
>
> >Just for the record, I don't think that Apple is really "selling
> >hardware" here. Nor are they "selling software."
>
> >They're building a digital distribuition network for creative content
> >that happens to have hardware and software components. Note that since
> >the implementation of iTunes for the PC, this is not a "strictly Mac"
> >model. Also note that, as other posters have mentioned, apple software
> >(Quicktime) is NOT strictly necessary for viewing.
>
> >The success or failure of iTunes - and by extension iTunes for Video -
> >is that it's a digital distribution model for making it EASY for users
> >to satisfy their desire for LICENSED creative content.
>
> But I don't want to buy any licensed creative content from Apple's
> store. I want to listen (legally) to all of the content that I already
> own on CDs, and I want to do it using WMA-compressed audio (because it
> takes less space). Apple's iPods don't work for that, when they could
> easily do so - without losing any of their existing capability as part
> of their "digital distribution network".
>
> Dave

That's fair Dave,

But what you're actually saying is this.

"I know you guys invented this thing. I know it meets your business
goals, and it clearly meets the market's needs because it's selling like
hotcakes. However, I'm ticked because it doesn't do everything *I* want
so I don't think you've got it right."

Clearly, a millions of humans world wide have decided that the
iPod/iTunes model meets their needs just fine.

They don't seem to give a rats behind about WMA compressed audio - (or
any of a half a dozen other compression alternatives!) Heck, most of
them don't even understand the difference between AAC, Mp3, and WMA -
all they care about is that the music sounds good enough when they plug
in their headphones on the plane, in the bus, or riding their bike.

I suppose that what this means is that what YOU want to do is far less
typical than what most other people want to do.

I'll just note that historically, great long term businesses are usually
built by bringing wanted functionality to the masses.

It's how MS became MS - and how Apple became Apple and Henry Ford put
America on the road - nobody could argue that the Ford was the worlds
best automobile, even back then there were plenty of better designs. But
Henry knew that people wanted easy access to cars - just like Apple
seems to understand that people want EASY access to legal music.

And to the extent someone provides customers with what they want, they
should make money doing it.

Frankly I'm surprised by all the posts moaning about Apple not providing
Quicktime Pro functionality for free.

Jeez, the upgrade costs about what you could save in a week by bringing
your lunch from home rather than eating out.

Want full screen quicktime - PAY THE MONEY. Heck at least it will be
going to a company with a history of interesting R&D! (Firewire,
Quicktime, iPods, etc) rather than to some offshore "stick cheap
components in the ugliest box possible and sell it cheap" vendor.

Maybe your bucks will help Apple invent/adapt/refine something else cool
next year.

My 2 cents anyway.

[Back to original message]