iTunes now holds 66% of digital music market

iTunes gave up on DRM a while ago for their music files, they should just be plain AAC files nowadays unless I’m mistaken.

You do realize DRM came about because of the RIAA. If Apple and other Digital music stores could have just sold it from the start with no DRM they would have. Get your facts straight. Complain to the RIAA for making the mess.

I’m not saying it applies to every person who owns an iDevice but you have to admit it’s a significant advantage to force people to install your media store just to connect their device to their computer (and before anyone says it, I’m fully aware that alternative options exist but the majority of iPod/iPhone/iPad owners will be using iTunes).

So what do you think that means to internet companies when Google has 70% and growing share of the search business? Is that right? Fair???

If it doesn’t apply to every person, does it apply to _any_ person? Is there anyone complaining that they can’t figure out a way to buy music from Amazon and put it on their iP*? No. Personally, I think the argument is specious.

Apple is not forcing you to use iTunes to buy music, only to sync your iP* with your computer. Very significant difference. I’m _forced_ to buy a $19 power cord, but I’m not forced to buy Power from Apple. they give me free software to manage my computer, and it happens to have a hook to easily buy (anything;-) apple sells. Cross sell and Upsell are not placing anyone at a competitive disadvantage.

In any event, you’re backpeddling. As a consumer, I EXPECT a convenient way to load music onto my personal device. Apple has provided it. They have also provided a convenient way to purchase music and other content electronically. I buy Amazon music all the time, as well as CDs from the Pawn shop. Hardly an anti-competitive (unfair) stance by Apple. It is significant to provide a highly integrated device management system that includes managing both music purchasing and my music library.

bottom line: significant advantage != unfair advantage.
smart != illegal.

@Ernie: I don’t really see what that has to do with anything.

@theothergeoff: no-one’s back-pedalling.
And when did I say Apple force you to buy music from iTunes? I didn’t.

But they do force users to install a piece of software just to copy music from a computer to a portable device and it just so happens to be the same piece of software that they use to sell music.
If you want to pretend that that doesn’t give them an advantage, that’s up to you.

Not to say what I do is correct but I never buy music from iTunes. I purchased 1 episode of The State but I never purchase music from iTunes. I use a number of “illegal” sources. I’ve never felt I’ve needed to purchase music from them especially when there are alternative to 99 cents a song. Good for them but I’m not spending money on iTunes.

@Step666

Until Apple forces me to buy an iPhone, iPad, Touch etc etc, then all your other “force” arguments are invalid.

You can express your dislike for a company but don’t let your opinion change facts.

The majority use iTunes because they like the portal and how its integrated with the iDevices. They are not forced to buy music off of iTunes. They can buy DRM free music from anywhere and copy it on to the iDevices. Even Apple sells DRM free music, once the industry ALLOWED them to.

First one guy complains DRM is Apples fault, when its the content rights holders fault. Y’know RIAA, TV networks and so on. Now Apple is forcing them to buy music through iTunes?

What next? Complain the built in Xbox Live App on WinMo7 phones is forcing them to get an Xbox and subscribe to XBL. Really?

I have no idea how they get away with it.

I also have no idea why when MS are forced to provide Windows with no web browser pre-loaded and a pop-up that links to various competitors’ browsers as well as their own, that Apple get away with pre-loading Safari in OS-X.
Using their software updater to coerce people who didn’t already use it to download and install it – quite how is it an ‘update’ if you’re installing something you didn’t previously use/have/want?

The difference is that MS forced OEMs to install IE (it’s a DELL computer). Apple has no OEMs. It’s THEIR product.

Look at Android. Verizon can put BING search on their android phones… Microsoft wouldn’t let Dell put Netscape on their (DELL) computers. Big Difference.

Your last point is valid. Apple sucked big rocks on that.

But if you want to use an iPod, you need ‘an’ interface. Apple built a HW/SW one. If you don’t like it, buy a MP3 player that just treats the device as a USB disk. Problem solved. Apple in no way prevent that. Microsoft, on the otherhand, prevented Dell et al from selling non MS installed computers (with licensing agreements that required EVERY Intel computer to be shipped with a Windows license, even if the customer wanted linux installed, or they would not allow you to sell an Windows installed PCs….. Now that’ s _unfair_.

This is where the whole thing about the web browsers gets confusing because everyone seems to have a different idea as to the reason why MS were pinged.

Someone else once tried to tell me it was because of the way MS used to integrate IE into the OS, requiring users to make use of it for installing upgrades in a way that Apple didn’t with Safari.
But as of Win7, that’s no longer the case, so why is it still an issue for them to pre-install IE?

You’re now saying it’s because they forced OEMs not to pre-install other browsers.
We can be pretty certain that’s no longer happening if they’ve already been fined for it but why if they’re no longer stopping OEMs installing other browsers are they no longer allowed to pre-install IE?

Maybe I’m missing something…

And I’m not saying that what MS were doing was fair, clearly it wasn’t.
But whatever their previous anti-competitive behaviour, it seems like an overly-severe measure to force them to stop including IE and to have to advertise their competitor’s products. And we’re not just talking pre-installed systems, it’s the same for all copies of Win7 purchased in the EU.

The law moves slower than the real world. For a long time, Apple has been the little guy fighting the monopolistic behomoth (Microsoft). Now they’re the 800 pound gorilla, but it will take a while before the DoJ or FTC go after them.

It’s true that Apple doesn’t force anyone to use iTunes, but there’s a strong vertical integration and you can argue that Apple now possesses market power in this area.

Exactly, but if they go after Apple for strong vertical integration, it can spread to a lot of other companies like Sony, Microsoft, Toshiba and many more. The fact is they all do it. Apple like the rest will always push for you to use their family of products just like how sony will push for you to buy their TV and hook up their Blu-ray player or PS3, and their home theater and their laptops I hope @Step666 finally get it.

Anti-competitive behaviour is to use a position of market dominance to give yourself an advantage over the competition.

Apple have a position of dominance within the portable media player market and they use it to force people to install the software they use to sell music.
As I clarified above, I’m not saying that Apple force people to buy music from them but they don’t need to go that far for it to be an unfair advantage – it’s still a significant push in the direction of their own media store ahead of alternative sources.

so you agree with me: “they don’t need to go that far for it to be unfair’ == ‘they are currently acting fair’

So… following your own logic. They are acting fairly.

Are they disallowing other media store sources on the PC or the Mac?
Are they disallowing common media types on the PC or the Mac?
Are they allowing their music to be transferred to other media?

Bottom line… is Apple acting Exclusionary or is fixing prices or forcing a lower quality product on people? nope.

Therefore, it’s not anti-competitive behaviour. Monopolies are not illegal… Monopolies that use their position to gain unfair advantage over competition are. Show me one instance where Apple is restraining the rights of other music vendors or device makers?

I don’t think you interpreted what I said correctly.
I said they don’t need to force people to buy music from them for their practices to be unfair, meaning that what they do just now is unfair.

And yes, I willing cede that Apple are not behaving in an exclusionary manner but exclusionary practices are not the only form of anti-competitive behaviour.
Lets go back to MS and IE – the mere act of pre-installing IE is not exclusionary yet they’re not allowed to do so.

Clearly we’re not going to agree on this matter though and it seems that the EU and the likes share your interpretation of the current situation.

One final question though, you touch upon Apple allowing their media to be used on non-Apple devices.
So are you admitting that Apple’s previous use of DRM-infested AAC files was anti-competitive? Because they were allowed to do that for a long time with really no scrutiny from the likes of the EU.

You can’t buy music on your iPhone without having had to install iTunes because you couldn’t've activated your iPhone until it was connected to iTunes.

Understood. However the OP was inferring that you couldn’t buy iTunes music without going through his PC. you can just ‘download the file’ to your iP*. I’ve never used PC ITunes so I can’t comment on the reasons why someone wouldn’t want it on their PC. (I can understand Safari, but iTunes?)

Again, if people were upset about this, they can just buy a different device. Apple isn’t forcing them to buy an iP* or pay money for ITMS. (charging $19 for the USB power adaptor and cord… that’s gotta be illegal somewhere!!!)

Yeah, fair’s fair, I was being deliberately perverse there.

As for iTunes on the PC, admittedly this was a couple of years ago but when I used it it was shockingly poor.
When I went to install it, I already had the latest version of Quicktime installed but iTunes told me I didn’t and had to install it. So, it proceeded to uninstall Quicktime so that it could re-install the very same version except it screwed up and I had to manually delete files and edit the registry so I could just get the damned thing installed – Apple’s tech support told me to contact MS, very helpful(!).
Then when I switched to an x64 OS a wee while later, iTunes completely refused to install despite all x64 versions of Windows having the means to correctly install and run x86 software.

And that’s another thing, why do you have to have Quicktime installed to use iTunes?
It used to be it checked for it when you installed iTunes but you could get rid of it again, later it changed so that every time you run iTunes it checks for it and if it’s not there, it doesn’t work.

And I agree that Apple aren’t forcing people to buy their products but I’m not aware off the top of my head of any other smartphone that requires you to install a piece of software and connect your phone to it just to get it up and running.

I don’t have an iPod/iPhone/iPad/iWhatever. I already have another program I use for my media library, and I deleted all Apple software a long time ago after they started installing stuff without my permission and nagging me to install more.

That’s OK, though. I’ll buy my music on Amazon.