Submitted by “Is Michael Robertson afraid of anything? The entrepreneur has a made a career – and a fortune – playing rough with giants. Now, though, he’s turning up the volume: predicting an end to Apple’s hold on digital music, shaking up the Linux community by looking to marry open source smarts with proprietary know-how, and talking trash about Microsoft’s new Zune. Pay attention, because this is a guy who finds a way to win every time he mixes it up.”
Pay attention, because this is a guy who finds a way to win every time he mixes it up.
The biggest questions one has to ask oneself is: Who else is winning along side Robertson? Does it really benefit anyone else, or is it the Robertson show?
“The biggest questions one has to ask oneself is: Who else is winning along side Robertson? Does it really benefit anyone else, or is it the Robertson show?”
Don’t you think opening music technology benefits us all, even when he makes money?
If it really is about opening it up, then yes. But how much freedom have Robertsons previous endeavours really brought to the world?
So far I see a failed MP3.com. An abomination distro and wild plans with SIP and music API’s.
So, mp3.com was a win?
Linspire was a win while Robertson ran it?
Basically the guy brings bad publicity to everything he touches while making money in the courts. He’s a real pursuer of the American dream: Screwing someone else out of his money in a court of “law.”
So who got screwed when it came to Lin(spire|dows)?
All the people using Linspire, if you’re looking at it from the freedom point of view. They still are bound to licensing restrictions they tried to escape.
It is no win to be locked in to MP3 or WMA/WMV. You still are beholden to the interests of Fraunhofer and MS.
If Robertson was serious about open technology and a free market, he would have made Ogg Vorbis and Theora pervasive in Linspire, with easy to use tools and a supportive Linspire branded hardwareplayer to go with it.
But no, real freedom is to lock people into WMA/WMV by including it in Linspire, so that MS and the content industry can impose a DRM prison later on via these codecs.
Short term views are tiresome. Lockin-ware is never about freedom, it is always about shortsighted, instant gratification.
The tax payers who paid for that silly tripe. The legal system that had to suffer that silly tripe. The people whose lives will be affected negatively by the extra lawyers we employ for that type of tripe.
Our society, because this sort of things happens and it’s really just overhead. Anyone who had to relearn that “Lindows” is now “Linspire” and those are the same thing. Anyone who had to throw out the graphics they made that said “Linspire” although they were probably happy with their monetary compensation.
Anyone who paid money for a product of a company that netted a negative amount in that affair.
Is that a good enough list? He named it Lindows for the very reason why trademark exists: To get name significance from another product. Unfortunately for Microsoft, “window” is a word in common use, so it wasn’t clear cut.
He knew that going in, and that’s why he did it. There’s no altruism in playing off someone elses name to sell your own product against theirs.
I forgot one: Every Linux advocate who has to be associated with the style of “entrepeneurship” and “creativity” that Robertson employs.
Edited 2006-09-06 22:51
I think without question if you want to go mainstream you have to recognize that people want to watch Flash movies or play MP3 tracks or Windows Media Tracks; you have to see that and if you don’t, you’re simply hurting yourself. The purists have really protested any sort of mainstreaming of Linux, and because of that, you can’t walk in to the average computer store today and buy a Linux laptop. We’ve had five or 10 years of doing it the purist way, and now I think it’s time to combine the power of open source with proprietary code, because [it] simply is fundamentally core to the Internet experience.
Strikes me this is the nub of what Robertson has to say about Linux in the interview. No right or wrong answer to “going mainstream” but in the end the market – i.e. users, I hope, not megacorp – will decide, I guess.
The problem with “the users decide” is as to how the users come to make their decision. MP3 is popular and supported; the fact that OGG is open and free isn’t enough to incite a change. So MP3 stays, and all that happens is that Linux suffers (ideologically) and users suffer (by having to pay for what should be free).
I don’t have any kind of fancy solution to this—in the short term, maybe it is better for Linux, or at least some distros, to cough up for royalties and so on, just so that they can move with the inertia that the industry in general has gained in a certain direction. But if they do that, what’s left to incite change in the long term? But on the other hand, if in the short term Linux doesn’t do this, what’s to incite people to adopt it? Firefox succeeded because it offered tangible advantages to the user; advantages which could be immediately grasped and seen. Free versus proprietary codecs don’t really have that benefit.
Of course, I /have/ MP3, Flash, and the various funky media codecs all working quite happily in Linux—but the legality of it is questionable (the ethicality less so). But for the average users, the sort of people we’re trying to lure away from Windows, getting this working ranges from being a pain to being impossible. Things should work out of the box; that’s the user’s expectation, and I think it’s reasonable.
Still, I can’t say I support short-term plans to capitulate ideologically so as to gain a foothold economically. Short-term solutions are just that.
Edited 2006-09-07 02:49
I think without question if you want to go mainstream you have to recognize that people want to watch Flash movies or play MP3 tracks or Windows Media Tracks;
The problem for Robertson is that I can actually do all that on any Linux distribution. What is this guy on about?
I’ll believe it when I see everybody around me showing it off
He makes two clear predictions, and one rewrite of history.
The rewrite is: “So, they’ll potentially get overrun in the same way that the original Mac, which created the PC industry, was overrun as well.”
There is no way this is a reasonable description of the events of 1983-7. Whichever product created the PC industry, it was not the original Mac. The situation with the iPod is completely different. It really has created and industry and dominates it.
He then goes on to say that “Closed” technology will eventually lose to open technology even if it’s inferior. So he predicts the end of the iTunes domination of the online music market. And he predicts that “The Zune is going to be stillborn. I think it’s going to be a disaster”. This is because it is not any more open than the iPod.
So we will see rather soon. If he is right, Zune will bomb, and Apple’s share will shortly decline in online music.
He’s predicting the future based on the lessons of history, but one would have more confidence if he could remember the history a bit better.
…Yeah, the other problem is he’s using proprietary software (codecs, etc) to try and kill…proprietary software. Which to me is rather like trying to dry something by pouring water on it.
He did get his history wrong on the details, but close on the gist: the //e made enough inroads into business (especially with the CP/M card) that IBM had to take notice of the personal computer industry. The PC was a direct reaction to Apple’s growing business sales (and nearly ubiquitous distribution channels): IBM’s first strategy was to buy CP/M, remember.
“There is no way this is a reasonable description of the events of 1983-7”
Official IBM clone started in 1982.
Apple official clone started in 1995.
Apple was overrunned and outnumbered by the hardware side long before being overunned on the software side.
They ( Apple computer ) had a real GUI in 1983.
Microsoft Windows version 3.0, was released in 1990
Its there closed source and monolithic nature that did them in.
Dell offered to preload Mac OS X on its Dell , they refused , when they should have authorized Dell to only ship with previous version as default and if people whant the latest they have to buy an upgrade on Dell hardware this way they protect there own hardware who always ship with the best Mac OS X as to offer as default.
Michael Robertson is taking on closed MP3s and DRM by offering an open API, DRM-less, MP3 offering, and letting the market decide. He is betting that people will prefer to be able to play their legally purchased tunes on any device of their choosing, not what Apple or Micorsoft or Universal or Sony dictate.
I, for one, think he will be right. The big players are going to shoot themselves in the foot with their DRM schemes and trying to lock in their customers and lock out competition.
In the end, it is all about the consumer. And ultimately, open standards and freedom of choice and true competition are all what benefit the consumer the most.
Thus, I wish Michael Robertson all the best with this latest venture.
Q: And so we’ve got to ask you, you’ve recently made CNR–your software update service for Linspire–free. If I’m an Ubuntu user, am I going to be able use this in order to fill up my machine with capabilities like the ability to do DVD playback, Flash, Quicktime? Is that a possibility?
A: If you’ve ever tried to install software on Linux, [you know] it’s really difficult. There’s no easy installer, like an XP user would be used to, and Click and Run goes beyond that, right? One click and everything is downloaded and installed, icons on the desktop, etc. So, absolutely, I think that’s something that makes a lot of sense and so we’re definitely looking at something like that.
Easy Ubuntu installs all the media codecs in about five clicks.
Easy Ubuntu installs all the media codecs in about five clicks.
yes, but it is the “legality” of those clicks that comes into question, yes, Automatix and Easy Ubuntu can install those codecs, but are they legal?
Linspire and Click N’ Run legally install them.
Outside of DVD support, yeah they are.
The DMCA covers *encrypted* formats, and Fraunhofer/MPEG-LA’s legal vultures rely mostly on the threats of bankrupting those they sue in legal fees. How many of those open source projects have been served with C&Ds? How far did Unisys get with attempting to collect licensing fees for *decoding* GIFs?
DMCA even allows an “interoperability” loophole which essentially says “reverse engineer as long as you don’t use it to translate to non-encoded formats, and don’t publish the algorithm.”
“Nobody is suing so it must be ok”, is not a very convincing argument.
“SCO is suing so it must be valid” is not a very convincing argument, either.
“Nobody is suing so it must be ok”, is not a very convincing argument.
Agreed.
However, “Nobody can find a law under which it could be considered illegal” is a better arguement.
Further, “lobbyists have tried but are completely stumped on how they can frame a law to make a given act illegal only on Linux computers” is an even better arguement.
Well, here where I live, yeah, they are legal…
//Automatix and Easy Ubuntu can install those codecs, but are they legal? //
How can they not be legal?
I could download for free RealPlayer for Linux and get codecs, I could download RealPlayer for Windows or Quicktime for Windows for free, install them under Wine on Linux and get codecs that way.
So how on earth could it be illegal for me to get codecs via another route?
What possible rule could I violate?
RealPlayer has paid the necessary license fees needed, those other places haven’t. It’s really just that simple.
//RealPlayer has paid the necessary license fees needed, those other places haven’t. It’s really just that simple.//
So as a Linux user, I go here:
http://www.real.com/linux/
a quick download and I’m good to go? Perfectly legal to then use the codecs on Linux.
If I legally get this file:
http://www.real.com/realcom/R?href=http%3A%2F%2Fforms.r…
… but then I extract from the RPM file only the codecs I want, I don’t even have to install RealPlayer and I can still have codecs.
Thankyou, and goodnight!
Edited 2006-09-07 12:25
Obviously technically you can. There are plenty of other much easier ways to technically solve this problem. The question here is one of legality and licenses. And then question is if you can use their codec with other media players. I suspect that if you read the relevant license files you’ll find that you’re not allowed to.
//RealPlayer has paid the necessary license fees needed, those other places haven’t. It’s really just that simple.//
Or … I could just get this for my Linux box:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FFmpeg
FFmpeg have reverse-engineered and reimplemented, among others:
* The Sorenson 3 Codec used by many QuickTime movies
* Advanced Streaming Format
* Windows Media Audio
* Windows Media Video (and thereby also the associated DivX hack)
* QDesign Music Codec 2, used by many QuickTime movies prior to QuickTime 7.
… including this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libavcodec
It’s really just that simple.
Edited 2006-09-07 12:51
““Closed” technology will eventually lose to open technology even if it’s inferior. There is no question Apple makes the best MP3 player today. ”
Open formats such as OGG haven’t overtaken MP3. Or WMA, for that matter.
I can’t help thinking it’s because vendors don’t want to be locked in with what some (including me) consider a horrifically viral license.
If it was under the BSD license, I’m sure we’d see more of it.
“Apple makes the best MP3 player today.”
I beg to differ on that point for sure. They penetrate the market– That doesn’t make them the best. By that train of thought Windows is the best operating system and Dell make the best PCs.
Edited 2006-09-06 21:55
The format specification is in the public domain. What is so horribly viral about that? See: http://vorbis.com/faq/#flic
So you might not be able to get a quick freebie, when you object to the licensing of Xiphs own software implementation, but since the format is PD, there is nothing stopping you or anybody else from writing Ogg compatible software under any license one sees fit.
//since the format is PD, there is nothing stopping you or anybody else from writing Ogg compatible software under any license one sees fit.//
And in fact many people have done exactly that.
Open format <> open source.
It is pure misinformation that might have suggested otherwise.
Edited 2006-09-07 03:38
er, what the hell does the software license of the reference implementation of Vorbis have to do with whether or not you choose to use it? It’s not like you have to use their code. Or is the reference implementation of MP3 decoding better licensed? Do you use that code?
“I can’t help thinking it’s because vendors don’t want to be locked in with what some (including me) consider a horrifically viral license. ”
You dont think and you dont know what your talking about , the GPL is a license in use commercially and is not viral , you have to choose to use it or choose the software that use it to encounter it , but then the truth never got in the way of your falacy …
BSD’s are a four decade ( 36 years ) License that is so bad that today its almost not in use at all for anything , people take the code and switch it to something else.
http://www.vorbis.com/faq/#flic
What licensing applies to the Ogg Vorbis format?
“The Ogg Vorbis specification is in the public domain. It is completely free for commercial or noncommercial use. That means that commercial developers may independently write Ogg Vorbis software which is compatible with the specification for no charge and without restrictions of any kind. However, the software packages we have developed are available under various free/open-source software licenses with varying allowances and restrictions.”
http://www.vorbis.com/faq/#slic
What licensing applies to the included Ogg Vorbis software?
” Most (but not all) of our utility software is released under the terms of the GNU GPL. The libraries and SDKs are released under our BSD-like license.
Note that developers are still free to use the specification to write implementations of Ogg Vorbis licensed under other terms.”
“If it was under the BSD license, I’m sure we’d see more of it. ”
I bet one gazillion dollar your wrong ! Now pay up …
The mp3tunes site would REALLY take off and would be great if it offered ogg as well as mp3 and had more than just indy bands they need to compete with itunes and yahoo etc they need to have 1 – 2 million popular/mainstream artists aswell as the indy artists.
The locker feature is cool but where will ppl purchase all their music from not mp3tunes.com so if he doesnt get those 1-2 million popular artists his venture is basically stillborn
http://contracts.onecle.com/lindows/microsoft.settle.2004.07.16.sht…
http://www.linspire.com/lindows_news_pressreleases_archives.php?id=…
Just some interesting info.
If you’ve ever tried to install software on Linux, [you know] it’s really difficult. There’s no easy installer, like an XP user would be used to
Someone is caught out in a very-easily-debunked lie here.
http://www.pclinuxonline.com/wiki/QuickStartSynaptic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synaptic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Package_management_system
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/SynapticHowto