main

RealNetworks unveils managed subscription service

vincent   on 10 April 2002 - 14:08 · 4 comments & 103 views

Advertisement (Why?)
Flushed with the success of its own recently launched content subscription service, RealNetworks said Tuesday that it is offering content providers the ability to create their own managed subscription services based on the Real platform.
The Seattle, Washington, company's new service will be delivered through the Real Broadcast Network (RBN), and offers companies the ability to create an e-commerce model around their content. The service was designed around Real's own RealOne SuperPass content subscription service, which launched in March.

RBN Managed Subscription Service offers companies customer registration and subscriber management, payment processing and billing systems, user report accounting, customer service and back-end hosting through the Real Broadcast Network. With the managed subscription service, content companies have the ability to drum up revenue through pay-per-view, rental or subscription models, Real said.

A handful of companies have already adopted the service, including Sony Pictures Digital Entertainment Inc. which is launching Soap City Radio through its SoapCity.com property, offering soap opera fans on-demand audio episodes streamed over the Internet, Real said.

The company did not immediately disclose pricing for the managed subscription service.

News source: PC World Australia


Schwartz was testifying as part of an antitrust case being pursued against Microsoft by the nine states, along with the District of Columbia, that did not sign on to a settlement agreement reached between the software maker, the US Justice Department and several other states in November. The litigating states are seeking stronger sanctions against Microsoft than were imposed in the settlement deal.

"In order for Web services to compete with PC operating systems, they must be able to access and interoperate with a dominant PC operating system and browser: Windows and Internet Explorer," Schwartz said. "If Microsoft can impede the ability of competing Web services to interoperate with Windows and IE, it can protect its operating system monopoly."

The burgeoning field of Web services is intended to provide one-stop shopping for consumers, who could access online sites--that is, the servers on which they reside--from a variety of computing devices including desktop PCs, handheld devices and cell phones. It's a more unified approach than is generally available today given competing and incompatible technologies.

Microsoft has staked an early claim to the territory with its .Net initiative, and Sun--a long-time software rival--has been hustling to catch up.

Schwartz described Microsoft's .Net applications as middleware "that will exist as a layer on top of the Windows operating system," but noted the company has chosen "to limit the disclosure of those APIs preventing their full implementation on non-Microsoft platforms."

APIs, or application programming interfaces, are pieces of software that allow third-party applications to work with Windows. They are a key facet of the antitrust case: Developers want better access to Windows APIs, complaining that Microsoft programmers get preferential treatment and thus can make Microsoft's middleware--applications such as the Windows Media Player--work better with Windows.

.Net applications run only on Windows, Schwartz emphasised. He argued that because Visual Studio .Net is the first distribution of the .Net platform, which is not yet part of Windows, it can be construed to be middleware.

Defining Web services
Much of Tuesday morning's courtroom proceedings before District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly focused on providing a definition of Web services.

During cross-examination by Microsoft attorney Steven Holley, Schwartz described Web services as "a platform" and said that Microsoft's Web services strategy "represents a threat" to the openness of Web services.

In a series of similarly worded questions, Holley attempted to get Schwartz to agree that Web services are a next-generation server-based application, but Schwartz consistently disagreed, saying that they are "agnostic with respect to platform."

Holley repeatedly attacked Schwartz's definition of Web services, which his written testimony said would include the simple downloading of text using a Web browser. He charged that such a definition contradicts the definition used by Sun, and repeatedly attempted to get Schwartz to agree that SOAP, XML, and UDDI--protocols used by Microsoft--are defined as Web services.

"I believe that is too narrow a definition," Schwartz said.

Schwartz used FTP (File Transfer Protocol) as an example of a Web service, which in 1990 which could be accessed only from a Unix command line but by 1995 could be accessed by a Web browser. He called that an "evolution" of Web services and said that it had nothing to do with XML.

In his written testimony, Schwartz charged that Microsoft can use Windows and IE to change the Web services experience for consumers. He noted, for example, that "Microsoft also has the power to exclude competing browsers from accessing or correctly displaying Web pages that Internet Explorer can correctly access and display."

He gave as an example the relaunch of MSN in October, when the Web site locked out competing browsers Opera, Mozilla and Netscape, among others. Even after Microsoft fixed the problem, IE displayed pages much differently than Netscape, he said, adding that with IE 6 it presents "a very modular and modern looking Web site," while Netscape's look and feel is "suboptimal."

In court, Holley and Schwartz sparred at length over how IE6 and Netscape display MSN differently. "The content is exactly the same; the difference is the format?" Holley asked Schwartz. Another issue involved whether Microsoft's MSN game site works with non-Microsoft browsers. Schwartz asserted this was an issue with ActiveX, and he and Holley spent a long time discussing the openness of ActiveX. Holley asserted that Netscape now supports ActiveX, but Schwartz suggested that was only because the Mozilla team reverse-engineered the technology, which, he said, is no way to run a business. Schwartz noted that Microsoft discontinued ActiveX for the Macintosh and charges US$3,000 for ActiveX for Solaris 2.5.

In written testimony, Schwartz said that the "browser is also a key distribution channel for middleware necessary for Web services. By controlling the browser, Microsoft can bundle middleware that supports its own Web services."

Schwartz also charged that Microsoft has the ability to ensure the ubiquitous distribution of .Net using Windows and IE. He gave as examples .Net Alerts, which are delivered using Window Messenger, and IE's ability to deliver Windows Media content through proprietary browser controls.

"If competing Web services cannot interact with Windows PCs to the same extent as Microsoft Web services...then the playing field is again tilted toward Microsoft," he said.

"A Web services gateway"
Schwartz further charged that using Windows XP's two bundled Web browsers--IE 6 and MSN Explorer--Microsoft has established "a Web services gateway." He noted that typing "e-mail" in the address bar of IE 6 brings up MSN search, which automatically connects to Microsoft's Hotmail Web site.

In court, Holley attempted to deflect Schwartz's allegations about IE and MSN Explorer by asking a witness whether AOL's Web client opens to AOL's home page and cannot be changed. Schwartz said it does but emphasised, "I don't believe AOL is a monopoly. I have the choice not to use AOL's product."

MSN Explorer, Schwartz said in written testimony, has "even tighter built-in links to Microsoft's Web services." He noted that through the buttons used to access content, "MSN Explorer actually locks its users into preselected Microsoft applications, Web sites and services that can't be altered."

The e-mail icon, for example, always takes people to Microsoft's Hotmail and the money icon to MSN Money Central. He noted also that people are required to sign up for Microsoft's Passport authentication service--a key element of the company's .Net strategy--if they want to use MSN Explorer.

Schwartz also gave other ways that Microsoft drives the adoption of Passport, which works only through Microsoft servers. Hotmail and MSN e-mail, for example, automatically register for Passport. Windows XP repeatedly prompts people to sign up for a Passport account following installation, Schwartz added.

"By exploiting its control of Windows, Microsoft can ensure that more PC end users will sign up for its .Net Passport service than any competing authentication service," he said.

In court, Holley said that PC makers in fact have the option to turn off the Passport nag pop-up in Windows XP. But Schwartz said he didn't know of any who had.

In his written testimony, the Sun executive concluded that Microsoft has the ability to "degrade or exclude competing services" and, through APIs and other means, to "threaten to impair or even prevent competing Web services from interoperating fully with PCs while simultaneously locking Windows users to Microsoft's Web services offered as a part of .Net."

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 4 additional comments

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)