DRM (remember: it's only on iTunes because the record labels demanded it)
Something tells me that Jobs didn't fight the "label-imposed" DRM very hard. It did, after all, lock iTunes store purchases to Apple devices.
Maybe, but it also creates brand resistance, and foments consumer resentment.
...for geeks. For most iPod buyers over the last few years, I doubt it has made much difference in either choice of player or subsequent brand loyalty.
That said, I do believe that more average consumers are becoming wise to the ways of DRM, and are starting to become vocal in their opposition to it. That, and not some deeply-felt support of fair use rights, is likely behind the Jobs commentary you linked to. At this point, the iPod and the iTunes store have such huge leads in market share that the benefits of lock-in are no longer so critical to the business model.
In fact -- and this is pure speculation, since I haven't gone over any sales figures -- if the music player market is getting close to the saturation point, it's possible that selling music for competing players is now more profitable long-term than selling players.
It's a sound strategy, and I don't begrudge Apple and Jobs their right to do what's in the best interests of their shareholders. But I wouldn't tag Jobs as any sort of proponent for consumer rights, since he and his company staunchly supported and furthered the implementation of DRM for as long as it suited them.
Topic: 100 Million iPods Sold (Read 6353 times)
