The Sonos system has been thoroughly written up in a number of articles and reviews, including Dan Frakes in Playlist (probably the most complete explanation of the system), David Pogue in the NYT and Walt Mossberg in the Wall Street Journal. But I think the best overview of the system and its advantages over competitors comes from Louis Rossetto writing at Cool Tools. Louis is one of the original founders of Wired Magazine, and his review provides more context than others I’ve read, which is essential in understanding why the $500 Sonos ZonePlayer is so much better than the $100 AirPort Express with AirTunes.

With so many good reviews, I’ll just add a few of my own notes:

• The system provides a wonderful out-of-box experience. Like an Apple product, unpacking is An Experience, with well thought out package design and gorgeous quick-start explanations.
• The Mac OS X software is terrific, it’s a standard application, no installer necessary. (I really appreciate that, and it stands in stark contrast to the Mac software for TiVo, which I decided I didn’t trust enough to install).
• On first run it checks to make sure you have the latest release of the software, and will download the newer version if you don’t. This is also true of the firmware in the Sonos hardware, which will automatically upgrade itself (you just need to confirm it’s OK).
• Running the assistant to set things up, it automatically detected my firewall settings, and gave exact instructions for what to do next, with instructions clear and simple enough they would pass the proverbial grandmother test. This was also true when I installed the Windows version of the software on Rochelle’s (now decomissioned) PC.
• The other steps in the process were similarly easy to just follow along as the software lead me.
• Most importantly, it was able to use my iTunes music library, natively and automatically.

That’s not to say that the Sonos Desktop software isn’t without flaws. It’s not iTunes, either in flexibility or in usability. But if you set up your playlists in iTunes, the Sonos can make use of those, so it gets the job done. You’ll want those playlists for your iPod anyway, right? And of course, it won’t play music purchased from the iTunes Store.

At any rate, for having music playing regularly, throughout the whole house, the Sonos cannot be beat. Highly recommended.

I agree with everything he wrote

That doesn’t change my conclusion that I won’t buy any more content from the iTunes Store until I can play it on my Sonos and TiVo systems. I don’t care if the source of the issue is Apple or the record companies, I only care that I can’t play it on devices I own and enjoy using.

If Steve is serious about offering non-DRM-wrapped content on the iTunes Store, there should be non-DRM-wrapped content on the iTunes Store

There are non-big four labels ready to do away with DRM yesterday, including those behind artists like Sarah McLachlan, Barenaked Ladies, and Avril Lavigne. Steve’s letter is currently undermined by the lack of any unprotected content on the iTunes Store. If he’s serious, that should change. That would put additional pressure on the big four labels to think about dropping DRM, as well as reduce pressure from the groups that are currently after Apple to open up FairPlay, redirecting it at the same big four. That seems like such a big win for Apple, I expect it to be their next move in this particular game.

The “big four” have to change something

The heart of Steve’s argument goes basically like this: (a) All DRM systems rely on secrets. (b) Once the secrets are known, it is possible, common, inevitable that the DRM will be broken, worldwide. ( c) If the DRM is broken, Apple is required by contract to rapidly fix it, or lose the ability to sell the majority of the music in the iTunes Store. (d) Licensing FairPlay means more people have the FairPlay secrets, which increases the risk of the secrets escaping. (e) The increase in risk is not acceptable, which is why Apple won’t license FairPlay.

That’s a pretty strong argument. It’s hard to suggest that Apple should significantly increase their business risk to assist their competitors, by licensing Apple technology to let those competitors improve their products. Yeah, it would be good for customers too, but the current situation, as Steve points out, only causes problems for 3% of people’s content. It’s a trade-off, and it’s reasonable for Apple to come down on the side of Apple.

The big four record companies are already suggesting that Apple is wrong and should work to license FairPlay. Fine. All they need to do is take ( c) above out of the equation. That’s something totally under their control, and if they are serious about wanting to see interoperability, instead of dropping DRM entirely as Steve suggests, then they need to put their lawyers were their mouthpieces are.

As Roman Strauss said in Dead Again, I think this is all very far from over.

1. Running into the wall of customers’ other (non-Apple) devices slows sales. Requiring people to give up things they like is more likely to lose sales than to convince them to buy new Apple stuff.

I’ve spent more than $400 on the iTunes Store, but I stopped buying FairPlay protected tracks 10 seconds after I realized they wouldn’t play over my new Sonos music system. And I won’t buy movies or TV shows from the iTunes Store because they can’t be played over the network via my TiVo.

I’m not going to buy an AirPort Express or an Apple TV for the privilege of buying content from the iTunes Store. Those devices do not work as well as my Sonos and TiVo, not even close. Instead, I’ll simply buy CDs, and keep my basic cable and Netflix subscriptions.

2. Apple is going to have to do it eventually. Too much success means lawsuits and government action, neither of which is good for business.

With the success Apple has had with the iTunes Store, they have or will reach a level that some will consider a monopoly. That in turn will bring consumer lawsuits and government intervention. It’s already happening in Norway, the Netherlands, and other European states. There’s a U.S. iTunes lawsuit, too. This is a headache Apple doesn’t need.

3. Apple is going to have to do it eventually. Too much success will turn the competitive market into “everyone but Apple.”

This happened to Microsoft. “Everyone but Microsoft” is constantly trying to make effective alliances, and constantly showing up to testify in lawsuits (see the previous item). While it hasn’t lead to Microsoft’s downfall, it has added drag to their momentum.

The efforts of Apple’s competitors have to date been pretty laughable, but when their current partners, the record companies, start saying they might consider selling music without DRM attached, it’s not because they’re happy with the status quo. Apple is so successful at selling music right now that Apple is in the driver’s seat, and that’s not something the recording industry has historically been good at accepting. At some point, “desperate times, desperate measures” will apply. And when your partners start conspiring against you, you’re fucked.

4. Apple is apparently already doing it.

Apple has apparently already licensed FairPlay to NetGear. A step in the right direction. There is a rumor this is the first of many.

5. People will like Apple more.

Customers. Partners. The market as a whole. Yeah, this is kind of touchy-feely, but if Apple opens up FairPlay voluntarily, before they are forced to, it will generate goodwill and positive buzz, and in the Internet age, that can spread pretty far and wide. Remember that the iPod didn’t start out as an iconic device, and a large part of its spread and success came from the same people who will be happy to see FairPlay opened up.