C. This week Mr. Jobs gave another explanation for his former defence of DRM: the record companies made him do it. They would make their music available to the iTunes store only if Apple agreed to protect it using DRM. They can still withdraw their catalogues if the DRM system is compromised. Apple cannot license FairPlay to others, says Mr Jobs, because it would depend on them to produce security fixes promptly. All DRM does is restrict consumer choice and provide a barrier to entry, says Mr Jobs; without it there would be far more stores and players, and far more innovation. So, he suggests, why not do away with DRM and sell music unprotected? This is clearly the best alternative for consumers, he declares, and Apple would embrace it in a heartbeat.
D. Why the sudden change of heart? Mr Jobs seems chiefly concerned with getting Europes regulators off his back. Rather than complaining to Apple about its use of DRM, he suggests, those unhappy with the current situation should redirect their energies towards persuading the music companies to sell their music DRM-free. Two and a half of the four big record companies, he helpfully points out, are European-owned. Mr Jobs also hopes to paint himself as a consumer champion. Apple resents accusations that it has become the Microsoft of digital music.
E. Apple can afford to embrace open competition in music players and online stores. Consumers would gravitate to the best player and the best store, and at the moment that still means Apples. Mr Jobs is evidently unfazed by rivals to the iPod. Since only 3% of the music in a typical iTunes library is protected, most of it can already be used on other players today, he notes. So Apples dominance evidently depends far more on branding and ease of use than DRM-related lock in.
【雅思阅读模拟真题:Selling Digital Music Makes Sense】相关文章:
★ 雅思阅读考前必看—Male ostrich erection
最新
2016-02-26
2016-02-26
2016-02-26
2016-02-26
2016-02-26
2016-02-26