Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

1. 

   Anonymous Coward, 20 Oct 2005 @ 5:50pm

   
   

   No Subject Given

   So, it's ok for Apple to do it with the iPod + iTunes crap, but MS is evil for trying it?

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

2. 

   nremdpm, 20 Oct 2005 @ 6:04pm

   
   

   Re: No Subject Given

   the ipod has tons of competitors that compete decently. microsoft competes with mac (linux doesnt count)
   
   apple just made a good marketing decision and had some good commercials

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

3. 

   does it matter, 20 Oct 2005 @ 6:05pm

   
   

   Re: No Subject Given

   exactly and you can't not say it's different since apple isn't a monopoly...bullshit...they have almost a complete monopoly over the mp3 player business

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

4. 

   ChaOS, 20 Oct 2005 @ 6:13pm

   
   

   Re: No Subject Given

   thats why they are being sued for forcing you to use iTunes...
   
   Apple = mp3 Player Monopoly

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

5. 

   Anonymous Coward, 20 Oct 2005 @ 6:19pm

   
   

   Re: No Subject Given

   Well, the thing is that Apple makes both iTunes and the iPod. You're free to use other people's software (iPodLinux) on the iPod, but it's not as though the iTunes section of Apple is forcing the rest of it to distribute iTunes-compatible iPods--it's within Apple.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

6. 

   nonuser, 20 Oct 2005 @ 6:35pm

   
   

   Re: No Subject Given

   The big monopolies in the digital world are:
   

   
   
   1. Microsoft's control of desktop operating systems
      
   2. Baby Bells control over local telephone loops
      
   3. Cable TV companies' control over local CATV service
      

   
   Notice what makes them so formidable, is that it's hard to imagine what a competitor can do to get around them. Even a smart, determined competitor with deep pockets can't knock any of these guys off directly, the best they can do is try to start a new industry based on a different paradigm. Can you imagine someone knocking off Apple in portable music? Sure, they've only been out there for a few years. Netscape was the big wheel in browsers for a couple years. Sony was the biggest player in electronics only a few years ago. What they don't have is an insurmountable position like the above three. And notice the above are all massive cash cows, so Microsoft and co. can afford to buy out lots of promising startups that are working on the paradigm shifts.
   
   

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

7. 

   DGK12, 20 Oct 2005 @ 6:42pm

   
   

   I have a subject!

   And apple doesn't allow distributors to distribute different OSs on a Mac. Apple doesn't let you use a different distribution of music for its IPod. Apple won't allow other MP3 players using iTunes... Apple has trade secrets and wont allow independent journalism. I've heard all this and more; Apple is a corporation too and plays by those rules, Cut Throat competition.
   
   Game over

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

8. 

   Anonymous Coward, 20 Oct 2005 @ 7:03pm

   
   

   Re: I have a subject!

   Very nicely put. It has nothing to do with being a monopoly, it has to do with who's the better marketer. Who's product is most appealing.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

9. 

   big j, 20 Oct 2005 @ 7:22pm

   
   

   Re: No Subject Given

   iPod + iTunes = APPLE. MS doesn't make a mp3 player. Apple bundles their software with their player. are you stupid?

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

10. 

    MikeJ, 20 Oct 2005 @ 8:35pm

    
    

    Re: No Subject Given

    Still, iTunes is damn slick. If all monopolies were like Apple's, I'd want more of them

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

11. 

    teKuru, 21 Oct 2005 @ 5:25am

    
    

    Re: No Subject Given

    Yeah well Windows + Internet Explorer + Windows Media Player = MICROSOFT, but yet everyone wants to sue MS to get them to take apart the package. All the lawmakers wanted it, but how many people have actually bought Windows XP N? How many OEMs actually sell machines with XP N?

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

12. 

    eeyore, 21 Oct 2005 @ 7:19am

    
    

    No Subject Given

    I use iTunes to download music but I don't have an iPod, so where's the monopoly?

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

13. 

    Anonymous Coward, 21 Oct 2005 @ 8:50am

    
    

    Re: No Subject Given

    steve jobs is just as much a maniacal monopolist as bill gates, he's just not as smart and more of a sleazebag.

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

14. 

    G, 21 Oct 2005 @ 10:34am

    
    

    Re: No Subject Given

    Apple isnt licensing their software at all. Thats the difference. Their product, their software. MS is licensing their software, they shouldnt be able to control the products of other peoples that simply license their software.

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

15. 

    Anonymous Coward, 22 Oct 2005 @ 2:28am

    
    

    Re: No Subject Given

    Monopolies are not illegal. When the courts finds one to be contrary to public good (as happened to MS), then that monopoly is declared illegal. Remedies are put in place. MS tried to violate one of the terms of the remedies handed down in its case.
    
    Also, haven't seen where Apple told any other company it had to sell its product and could not sell someone elses. SO how is this comparable? At all.

    [ link to this | view in thread ]