Real’s Rob Glaser: Apple’s Steve Jobs is ‘pigheaded’ | iLounge News


Real’s Rob Glaser: Apple’s Steve Jobs is ‘pigheaded’

RealNetworks CEO Rob Glaser said yesterday that Apple’s refusal to make the iPod compatible with other digital music stores besides iTunes was “pig-headedness” on the part of Apple CEO Steve Jobs. Glaser also said that Apple’s closed system promotes piracy of copyrighted music.

“We think Apple Computer, and Steve personally, are making a mistake by making the software proprietary,” Glaser said at the Digital Living Conference in San Francisco, noting that RealNetworks would continue catering to Mac users. “There’s no reason we should penalize Apple customers for Steve’s pigheadeness.”

“Steve makes for a good pinata because he’s taken a position against interoperability,” Glaser said. The music industry “should be pressuring him to change because they have leverage over him. Apple being on its own in term of interoperability makes piracy more compelling for consumers. Because, hey, if I take all my MP3s from this illegal site or that illegal site, they’ll work on the iPod or anything else. Whereas if I buy them legitimately, they’ll only work at one place.”

Related Stories



Open letter to Rob Glaser,

Your digital media days are numbered and you’re sad and desperate clinging to the little you have left.  Quit trying to grab headlines by taking potshots at Steve Jobs.  Stick to bowling, pal. 

Your friends,

30 Million iPod Owners

Posted by Fatso Glaser on December 6, 2005 at 11:35 AM (CST)




GOOD GOD, man! Do these people EVER stop whining about Apple’s iPod?

..... if I take all my MP3s from this illegal site or that illegal site, they’ll work on the iPod or anything else. Whereas if I buy them legitimately, they’ll only work at one place….

Is there something I’m not getting in this logic…?

Posted by ahMEmon on December 6, 2005 at 11:46 AM (CST)


Have another donut Rob…

Posted by SJR on December 6, 2005 at 11:50 AM (CST)


Real Networks is absolutely the worst.

Posted by JeffNNJ on December 6, 2005 at 12:21 PM (CST)


Given Mr. Glazer’s immature comments, he would be fearing for his job.  Seriously, something is wrong with a CEO when they lower themselves to personal attacks against another company.

Posted by Joe Bob on December 6, 2005 at 12:22 PM (CST)


Oops, should say “should be fearing” :)

Posted by Joe Bob on December 6, 2005 at 12:24 PM (CST)


The REAL problem with what Glaser is saying is that if Apple did open the iPod to work with his software, no one would use it anyway considering that iTunes is far superior to Real Player.

Much more important than being able to buy songs from other sources and using them on my iPod is the desire to use songs from iTunes on devices other than the iPod.  So, on this point, I think Glaser is right.

I don’t buy tracks from iTMS because I’m limited to using them on my iPod and not the Creative player I have or my Treo 650.

Posted by Talking Madness on December 6, 2005 at 12:36 PM (CST)


And not to mention that Itunes itself is the best weapon against pircay, since people can’t(or atleast won’t) download and distribute itunes songs all over the place like they do regular mp3’s

Posted by Andreas Nilsen Øye on December 6, 2005 at 1:34 PM (CST)


Rob comes across like one of those typical school bullies that call brighter kids names, and when you ask for them at reunion they’re ususally making license plates.

Posted by Bad Beaver on December 6, 2005 at 1:38 PM (CST)


Instead of Whining and Calling names, why don’t Real Networks put some effort into creating a Product as good as the iPod/iTunes.
Why don’t they form a Strategic Alliance with a Hardware Company, so their Music can be played on someone elses music player.
Oh that’s right; Real Networks has a bad name. They are notorious for sticking annoying ads in their product and disallowing the user any control over the content. None of the Hardware Manufacturers want anything to do with Real Networks, so why would Apple.

Posted by Salvo on December 6, 2005 at 2:07 PM (CST)


Rob makes a valid point. But what the others are saying is true, the RealPlayer software is flawed, went from being an amazing breakthrough in streaming video technology to be full of adware. Why would I pay for RealPlayer when Windows Media Player or Quicktime offer free versions?

I simply don’t get why they *still* haven’t created a great MP3 player that matches the iPod, at least a little.

Posted by Zaki on December 6, 2005 at 2:32 PM (CST)


Tracks purchased from the RealPlayer Music Store can already be transferred to the iPod without any loss of quality.  Of course, if you use iTunes to manage your iPod, you’ll have to stick with manual mode, otherwise iTunes will erase the files.
Why pay for 128Kbps files when a competitor offers 50% higher quality files (192Kbps AAC) for the same price, and often for less?

Posted by Galley on December 6, 2005 at 2:37 PM (CST)


This is really hypocritical.  It’s not like all MP3 players are compatible with Realplayer. And if I wanted to burn my paid realnetwork tracks onto CD, I would have to buy the full version of Realplayer (I think).

But that doesn’t matter, because real is rubbish anyway.

Posted by Adam on December 6, 2005 at 2:59 PM (CST)


I tried out Rhapsody’s new Mac support and I basically like it. iTMS provides nothing like Rhapsody. Rhapsody is akin to the music exploration afforded by the original Napster, and much, much better than that ever was. The ability to listen to all the albums you want, in entirety, for a set monthly fee is a pretty nice thing. I have not spent hours browsing it yet, but so far the library seems pretty extensive. Everything I have looked for is there (I’ve looked mostly at Indie music.) Certainly it’s a fantastic way to discover music. In contrast, the 30 second previews on iTMS don’t exactly cut it, and neither does listening to radio or even internet streams.

The need to actually buy albums would be greatly lessened with it, *except* that currently, at least, you can’t put Rhapsody tracks on your iPod. If I recall correctly, Windows users do have that ability (or is that limited to non-iPods?)

I have to say that agree with Glaser, if not with his choice of words, in that I really wish the iPod were open and allowed for other stores and services to provided content for it. It’s our loss that it does not. Lots of iPod heads seem to believe that not having other music purchasing/listening options is better. Why? Indeed, if Glaser ever offers Rhapsody To Go on the Mac, while I love my vPod, it might just get me to switch to a non-iPod in order to have that capability.

Posted by sjonke on December 6, 2005 at 4:00 PM (CST)


Give it a rest Mr. Glaser.  Apparently, your subscription service isn’t the iTMS killer you had hoped it would be.  Please, just pack up your things and go away already.

Posted by The Raven on December 6, 2005 at 4:06 PM (CST)


Glaser doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Open? Just how open does he want it? Isn’t he getting SDK’s from Apple already? What a poor sport.

AAC is an open standard - Apple isn’t perfect, but you know what? Steve “Pighead” Jobs has reached millions of customers previously untapped! So… here’s how it goes: Either you get off your duff and get busy or keep your useless trap shut.


Posted by UncleVisen on December 6, 2005 at 4:18 PM (CST)


Since iPod owners are what I would refer to as, a bit more cultured, I wouldn’t think much of his ranting and raving is going to persuade to any of us. It just sounds a bit child like. If they would have made the iPod and the music store and it was successful, would they allow others to profit off their device and store? Seriously, does anyone here think so? Yeah, me either.

Posted by carson on December 6, 2005 at 4:21 PM (CST)


“Why pay for 128Kbps files when a competitor offers 50% higher quality files (192Kbps AAC) for the same price, and often for less?”

Because it’s inconvenient.  People love the iPod/iTunes/iTMS simplicity.  When will people like you begin to understand this simple concept???

Besides, who the crap REALLY cares if your file is 64Kbps better than the next guy’s???  PLEASE, give these ridiculous compression comparisons a friggin’ rest.  Face it, most folks just don’t hear, or care about, the difference.

Posted by The Raven on December 6, 2005 at 4:26 PM (CST)



Posted by Cameron T. on December 6, 2005 at 4:54 PM (CST)


So what else is new.  For those who can remember back that far, Steve Jobs has a history of keeping his stuff proprietary…he did it with the Apple Computers back in the eighty’s for what ever reason (pride, greed) at a time when the IBM was licensing they’re inferstructer to everyone.  Opening it up to all third party companies interested because it made good business sense.  Now PC’s are the defacto standard in the business world even tho Apples computers are far superior in graphics.  It cost Mr. Jobs a ton of money and kept Apple a niche market product from which it’s just now starting to come out of due to a much smarter marketing strategy.  Apple Stores popping up everywhere, in every town and mall will go a long way in helping get the Apple brands into homes.  So I agree that keeping iTunes the way it is is probably gonna cost Apple in the long run.  But hey, that’s just my .02 cents.

Posted by Randy Bat on December 6, 2005 at 5:44 PM (CST)

Subscribe to iLounge Weekly

Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter

iLounge is an independent resource for all things iPod, iPhone, iPad, and beyond.
iPod, iPhone, iPad, iTunes, Apple TV, Mac, and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc.
iLounge is © 2001 - 2018 iLounge, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy