Colin Meeks

I’ve been a professional programmer for over 20 years. I first started out using Televideo CP/M based machines, with varying 5 and a quarter inch floppy disk configurations. The highest spec machine had a 5 megabyte hard disk. From that, the company I was working for migrated to IBM compatible PC’s running DOS and then GEM, the long forgotten GUI alternative to Windows. It was when I left that company in about 1988, that got my first glimpse of Windows in 1987 when the company I moved to was using Windows/286 2.1. From that point on, I’ve pretty much used every single version of Windows.

For me, there have been 2 major releases of Windows and I’m just talking about desktop variants here. Windows 3.0 in 1990 took Windows to a whole new level and finally Windows was usable by the masses. I’ll skip over Windows 95, as it was basically what Windows 3.0 should have been. Similarly I’m choosing Windows 2000 over Windows XP as for me, XP basically just added a prettier interface. Sure all my machines now use XP, but that’s down to the fact, it’s the OS that came with my machines.

So now Windows Vista is with us and I feel it’s just another catch up release. For me I see no compelling reason whatsoever, to hand over my hard earned cash to purchase an upgrade. Yes the user interface can look absolutely gorgeous, if you have a hugely expensive graphics card with enough memory to support it, otherwise you are basically looking at a new skin. Yes there are lots of new security features that protect inexperienced users from malicious software and online users from attacking your machine, but for me, these are very invasive and I’m just going to end up suppressing them.

Yes I’m vastly simplifying what you get with Vista, but I just see no killer reason to upgrade, especially if you have hardware and peripherals that are a couple of years old, some of these may not be compatible. Windows XP may be nearly 6 years old, but it’s a very capable operating system. Yes it has it’s flaws, but most of these are known and there are lots of third party applications and utilities to address these flaws. So for me Windows XP will be the OS of choice. Sure I’ll move up to Windows Vista eventually when I purchase new computers, but even that may not be a forgone conclusion. I already have a Mac Mini and may just purchase a full blown Mac as my main desktop machine. There’s also a few variants of Linux that may just be replacing Windows on a few machine around here soon.

It’s seems I’m not the only one hanging back on Vista. Sales have apparently been disappointing. Vista has taken over 6 years to come to fruition. I just hope they have something in the pipeline and are able to get it to the market much sooner, otherwise it just may be too late, if it isn’t already.

Now I could be barking up the wrong tree here, but I had a bit of an epiphany, could the recent furore regarding DRM have been cleverly masterminded. I know, conspiracy theories abound for many things, but this idea maybe bears careful consideration.

I spoke recently about Steve Jobs open letter on the subject of DRM, in which Jobs basically says now’s the time to sell music with no DRM. This admittedly has been brewing for years, capturing public attention and then subsiding again. However to me it has only reached the current peak since Microsoft launched their digital audio player. The Zune you’ll remember has an innovative feature, that allows users to beam songs between Zune players. This sounds great in principle, until you find that you have only 3 chances to listen to the music or three days which ever comes first. This in itself is a real pain, but where the complaints start, are that this happens even for MP3 music you legally own and is originally free of DRM and indeed podcasts, the vast majority of which have a Creative Commons license, allowing their supposed free use and distribution. So in effect the Zune is breaking this license by adding it’s own DRM.

Now my theory is, what if Microsoft introduced this feature, knowing full well that the general public and indeed tech community were going to be up in arms over it. The device itself is a very capable, stacks up nicely to the iPod, so why introduce a draconian feature unless you have an ulterior motive.

So if this is true, what does Microsoft get out of it. As of December, Microsoft had a modest 10% of the digital audio player market. It’s online music shop, the Market Place probably has an even smaller market share. It’s always going to be a pail competitor to the Apples mighty iPod and iTunes, unless the playing field is leveled and DRM is no longer an issue. Bill Gates himself said recently that “DRM causes too much pain for legitimate buyers“, so why not only enforce it, but enforce it to an almost puritanical level, unless you have an ulterior motive.

So assuming all this is true, surly Steve Jobs would be wise to this. Well maybe he is. As I discussed in a previous article, both Apples iPod and iTunes have near market saturation. They are a Goliath fish in a tiny pond. If DRM was removed from all music, they would become a giant in a vast ocean. Microsoft would also become a much larger player and the competition and rivalry would be taken to a whole new level, so a win, win for both companies. It would also be a win for the consumer, who would suddenly have free choice of where to buy music for their digital audio devices and the safe knowledge that their music can be played anywhere without restriction.

We’ll probably never know if this has been Microsoft’s strategy all along, but it surely makes for a compelling argument.

Steve Jobs has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons with his recent open letter “Thoughts on Music“. There’s been many conflicting opinions as to what Jobs is up to, but no matter what, it’s certainly a shrewd time for him to consider casting the iTunes web further. iTunes has a reported 82% of the digital download market, the vast majority of those protected by DRM. Yes it’s quite possible to eek a few extra percentage points, but for how much longer?

Looking to the future, there’s a whole lot of other ways to purchase your music online. Jobs knows this. After all, iTunes is not about selling music, it’s about selling iPods. With such a saturation level in DRM’d music, it’s only natural to begin looking at other avenues. There’s other pressures as well, such as the recent rulings in Norway and the fracas in France. This will either eventually lead to the fall of DRM, or Apple will look to dip their fingers in other pies. Yes you can already buy some select music in unprotected MP3 format, but they’re few and far between.

Ted Wallingford paints a picture of iTunes gone indie, with IndyTunes in his blog posting. A interesting idea and something that may not be all that unreasonable. Michael Robertson, founder of MP3.com and now better know for MP3Tunes.com and the Linspire (formerly Lindows) operating system, covers similar ground in his recent blog posting. He gives his ideas for iTunes, which include divesting some of the family jewels. Whilst I can’t see Apple going that far, I can see them beginning to place more emphasis on unrestricted MP3 downloads, whether they are established acts or independent artists. With EMI currently mulling the offering of their entire catalog without DRM, it’s certain that the first company to do this, will pretty much blaze the path for others to follow. Then the whole music scene will become virtually unrecognizable from the one we have today.

Jobs certainly looks to be wanting to shed the DRM shackles, so this may be the shape of things to come. No matter what, 2007 looks to be an interesting year for music.