iTunes sync spat between Palm, Apple continues

[AppleInsider]

The back-and-forth battle between Palm and Apple continues, as the Pre's webOS has been updated to once again sync with iTunes, in spite of a USB-IF statement against the practice.

Palm announced Saturday that webOS 1.2.1 was released, and Sprint customers will receive the update automatically, over the air. It re-enables Palm media sync to work with iTunes 9, and also addresses problems syncing EAS e-mail.

Earlier this week, Palm released webOS 1.2 which featured a number of fixes, but did not re-enable sync with iTunes 9. Earlier in September, when Apple released iTunes 9, it disabled the ability of the Palm Pre to synchronize media with the software.

When sync worked in previous iterations, the Pre identified itself as an Apple iPod via USB. That tactic was frowned upon by the USB Implementers Forum.

Weeks ago, the USB-IF issued a letter in response to a petition from Palm over its dispute with Apple. The non-profit organization that sets standards for the Universal Serial Bus sided with Apple, noting that Palm's tactic of improperly identifying the Pre as an iPod was in violation of the forum's policies. The forum also said that Apple's practice of limiting first-party devices to sync with iTunes was within the rules.

The full list of fixes in webOS 1.2.1, according to Palm, is as follows:

Resolved an issue where after installing the 1.2.0 webOS update some customers running Exchange 2007 could no longer synchronize with their Exchange account for Email, Calendar, Contacts, and Tasks.

Resolves an issue preventing media sync from working with latest version of iTunes (9.0.1).

Media sync now synchronizes photo albums, maintaining the album structure in the Photos app.

Media sync now allows for synchronizing photos without requiring the full-resolution originals. This provides faster display of high-quality full-screen images and enables users to store more photos on the phone.

Resolved an issue where if a user tried to play streaming music or video, the media stream might drop out or have a long delay before starting.

Addresses a security issue encountered by webkit developers. This issue did not impact end users.

[joe in miami]

This doesn't surprise me.

[LE Studios]

This doesn't surprise me.

It does to me. I never seen a company with so much disregard well as respect for using another company credentials to use with their product. Palm needs to go bankrupt and close it doors forever! They have no more creativity nor originality. :no:

[LE Studios]

Pre to iTunes: You complete me!

iTunes says to Palm:

"Get your filthy Palms off me! I'm not interested! This is Software Harassment!


Palm to iTunes:


"We were meant to be forever!"

[sflocal]

Resolves an issue preventing media sync from working with latest version of iTunes (9.0.1).


I like how they sugar-coated the actual "issue". Perhaps the below is the more proper description:

Re-enabled iPod impersonation to break into iTunes (9.0.1).

[Mac Voyer]

I started this (http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=103508) thread already. Perhaps they can be merged.

My last post stated that Palm was being dishonest when talking about interoperability as Palm Desktop is not exactly open to other devices.

[bobmarleypeople]

If it still identifies itself as an iPod, then Palm are really pushing it now.

However, you're forgetting that, unless Apple removed it, iTunes does sync with SOME 3rd party devices. Maybe Palm gave in and got iTunes to work with it as a Palm and not as an iPod.

Or am I giving Palm too much credit...

[Mac Voyer]

If it still identifies itself as an iPod, then Palm are really pushing it now.

However, you're forgetting that, unless Apple removed it, iTunes does sync with SOME 3rd party devices. Maybe Palm gave in and got iTunes to work with it as a Palm and not as an iPod.

Or am I giving Palm too much credit...

Nothing syncs with iTunes. Companies can access the xml data and create their own solutions, but not directly with iTunes.

[Zc456]

Jeeze, why can't they just use there own program? Even Sony's Ericsson has its own MP3 transfer application. I mean, unless there trying to get to Mac users, then just make it cross-platform.

[digitalclips]

Apple should have some code that detects the presence of a genuine Apple product over and beyond the USB check.

I will resist the temptation to suggest that then upon finding it isn't attached to a genuine Apple product it does naughty things. Nooo i would never suggest that.

[Mac Voyer]

Apple should have some code that detects the presence of a genuine Apple product over and beyond the USB check.

I will resist the temptation to suggest that then upon finding it isn't attached to a genuine Apple product it does naughty things. Nooo i would never suggest that.

I'll say it. Apple should totally brick anything that invades its ecosystem. Its like shooting a burglar.

[digitalclips]

I'll say it. Apple should totally brick anything that invades its ecosystem. Its like shooting a burglar.

Thanks, I was hoping someone else would suggest it ;)

How about Apple replaces all the music with Kenny G so the owner destroys their own Palm.

[bobmarleypeople]

Nothing syncs with iTunes. Companies can access the xml data and create their own solutions, but not directly with iTunes.

I found this that contradicts your statement
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2172?viewlocale=en_US

The article hasn't been updated since July 22 2008, so I don't know if the products mentioned work with iTunes 9, but I assume so.

[ascii]

How do Palm think this is going to end? Apple probably have legal agreements with their content providers as to the allowable syncing. If they can't stop them technically, they will have no choice but to sue. No choice because of their existing agreements.

[Roos24]

Frankly, I don't think that this is Apple's worst problem. And why would it, from all I read and hear Palm is running on fumes.

The latest information is that Palm sold just 375,000 Pre's, far from the number needed to break even. Selling them for $49.00 doesn't help either.

The problem will take care of itself.

[mkral]

This whole battle seems like a losing proposition for Palm. Imagine if you bought an iphone and every week or couple of weeks it stopped syncing with your media. Eventually it gets fixed, but sooner or later it stops syncing again. This happens over and over. Regardless of who is right and who is wrong, eventually, I'd get tired of this and look for alternate solutions. Even if palm re-enables sync every time, I'd still be pissed if I was a pre user and couldn't get new media onto my phone for a few days or a few weeks every time itunes blocked it. Maybe I"d find some kind of third party software, like the missing sync, or maybe I would go for a new phone. If I went for a new phone, I doubt I'd get the new pre (whatever it was at the time I upgraded), as I know that this hassle is going to continue.

[Gazoobee]

I'll say it. Apple should totally brick anything that invades its ecosystem. Its like shooting a burglar.You know it *would* be like "shooting a burglar."

It would be a ridiculous over-reaction that says more about the general nastiness of the shooter than it does the burglar, and often leads to the complete destruction of everything the shooter was trying to defend in the first place.

:)

[Mac Voyer]

You know it *would* be like "shooting a burglar."

It would be a ridiculous over-reaction that says more about the general nastiness of the shooter than it does the burglar, and often leads to the complete destruction of everything the shooter was trying to defend in the first place.

:)

You can protect your home and family anyway you like. But if someone breaks into my house, I'm going to shoot the bastard. :smokey:

[slapppy]

It does to me. I never seen a company with so much disregard well as respect for using another company credentials to use with their product. Palm needs to go bankrupt and close it doors forever! They have no more creativity nor originality. :no:

Agreed. Palm has relegated themselves into a sleazy hack of a company.

[brucep]

Why doesn't Apple just sue them and get it over with?

apple is havin too much fun this way

but really AI is full of it . apple updates itunes all the time and 4th party anyone has to catch up


if A I was correct and there is a real fight between apple/palm then apple would cripple any pre entering its domain flying under a false flag to under the guise that itunes was being hacked .
which it is

but apple would never attack it own itune acc holders .
the pre will come around to iphone when sprint/verizon are allowed to sell the iphone

long f,,,ing posty sorry

[souliisoul]

I am really amused by all the posts, since everyone (majority) are giving Palm a hard time because it is direct competitor of iPhone and how dare a company use Apple's code to infiltrate the iTunes.
BUt Google Voice which replaces some of the core functions of iPhone, a number of people posting here have called foul on Apple for not approving the apps.

I see no difference from what Google is doing from Palm, except Palm are being very stupid by trying to make Apple look like the bad guy...wait is that not what Google is doing as well.

Hmm double standards! maybe
I actually want Palm Pre to success, so Apple have to innovate a better iPhone for consumers and Google Voice can kiss my ass, I will use Skype.

[Gazoobee]

You can protect your home and family anyway you like. But if someone breaks into my house, I'm going to shoot the bastard. :smokey:It's still an appalling over-reaction that marks you as both a meaner and more inhuman person than the burglar is likely to be.

Personally, I like to think I'm better than the average burglar, not worse.

Let me guess? You're American? ;)

[Homie]

lol. You guys are cracking me up!

No, Apple is not contractually bound by "their content providers" to keep music off other devices. lol

It's funny that you take such offense to a very minor hack on an Apple product yet you guys are so proud of your jailbroken iPwone or Touch. Just tell me that none of you have thought about jailbreaking.

I love my ipod and my Macbook. Apple does a great job making excellent products to use inside their ecosystem.

However, I also love my Palm Pre. Why does Apple feel they have to keep other excellent devices from working with their ecosystem? That just plain limits choice and hurts competition and ultimately customer experience.

"No, no! We can't have an alternative dialer or video app on the iPhone!"

"No, no we can't let people access their paid for, DRM free music via the playlists and software they are used to. We don't want to sell them any songs or anything."

Apple is being very petty about this. They are willing to lose the revenue for content that 800,000+ and increasing Palm Pre users would spend on iTunes because Stevie boy is pissed at John Rubinstein for joining Palm and Ed Collagen for turning down the "no hire" pact and hiring Apple employees.

Personally, I don't care if iTunes syncs with my Pre. I have a Nano for music. But it takes Palm an hour to fix every time and show exactly what type of a company Apple is every time they break it.

Who is the petty company here? Apple for sure. Palm is just poking them in the ribs and laughing. As they should.


--- BTW, if Apple were to intentionally brick a Pre they would be sued big time. The only way to do this would be to write some nasty code that wipes the ROM. Big, big lawsuit. And that brings me to another point. You folks say "Apple should just sue Palm." That's fine. And then Apple can quit using Palm intellectual property and you can lose you ringer switch functionality and all of your PIM syncing with your desktops. Yeah, Palm has patents on all that stuff. I didn't see them suing Apple. Maybe they are just a little more willing to compete and a little more consumer friendly. eh?

[jmnikricket]

Imagine if you bought an iphone and every week or couple of weeks it stopped syncing with your media. Eventually it gets fixed, but sooner or later it stops syncing again.

You do realize you don't have to update iTunes the day a patch comes out right? Just like many users haven't upgraded to SL while the 3rd party drivers catch up. This move by palm really surprises me though; are they trying to make enemies?

[Maxhomie]

Who is the petty company here? Apple for sure. Palm is just poking them in the ribs and laughing. As they should.


Palm Fanboy's first post!

If anything, this has become amusing from Apple's standpoint, because Palm now looks like the frighteningly stalker-ish girlfriend/boyfriend that continues to drive by the ex's home in violation of restraining orders.

I didn't really care one way or the other about this situation, and even considered a Pre for a while (though I continue to wonder why Palm doesn't just develop its own software). But now it's become clear that Palm is desperate for attention, especially with the indifference of carriers, and the Pre's modest and rapidly fading footprint in the market. Sort of like that character in reality shows that you know isn't going to win, but is determined to chew up every last minute of screen time with hysterics and manufactured drama before they get voted off.

[Homie]

Palm Fanboy's first post!

If anything, this has become amusing from Apple's standpoint, because Palm now looks like the frighteningly stalker-ish girlfriend/boyfriend that continues to drive by the ex's home in violation of restraining orders.

I didn't really care one way or the other about this situation, and even considered a Pre for a while (though I continue to wonder why Palm doesn't just develop its own software). But now it's become clear that Palm is desperate for attention, especially with the indifference of carriers, and the Pre's modest and rapidly fading footprint in the market. Sort of like that character in reality shows that you know isn't going to win, but is determined to chew up every last minute of screen time with hysterics and manufactured drama before they get voted off.

Yep, my first post here. BTW, I have 3 Mac's and we have 5 iPods in the house. Big Palm Fanboy. lol.

"indifference of carriers?" Uh. You're smoking it. In Europe and around the world carriers have been bidding for the Pre. And as soon as an analyst said that Verizon had decided to pass on it a Verizon executive came out and said "no way! We will get it in January!" You clearly don't know what you are talking about.

Yes, I would love to see them adapt Songbird and build an Amazon Mp3 store plug-in. But spending an hour on this every couple of months is not keeping them from doing that. Maybe they are? Who knows.

But Palm does not look like a stalker to me. I think they are getting a good laugh at Apple's expense. I am.

[Foo2]

I guess that makes the Pre non-USB compliant. I wonder if that means Palm can no longer advertise the Pre as supporting USB or having a USB port.

[anantksundaram]

How about Apple replaces all the music with Kenny G so the owner destroys their own Palm.

:lol: Best post so far.

[anantksundaram]

I am really amused by all the posts, since everyone (majority) are giving Palm a hard time because it is direct competitor of iPhone and how dare a company use Apple's code to infiltrate the iTunes.

This is a very good observation. I was one of the early to complain about Apple denying GV, but I've come around to the conclusion that Apple has somewhat of a point here.

[Quadra 610]

Thanks, I was hoping someone else would suggest it ;)

How about Apple replaces all the music with Kenny G so the owner destroys their own Palm.

Brilliant!

All Apple needs to do is to keep breaking the syncing. Palm customers will take care of the rest (complaints, dissatisfaction, etc.)

Palm is already losing with the Pre. It's been a dud so far.

[brianb]

Why wouldn't Apple sue Palm over this? Simple. Because they'd lose. Lose big.

Let's face it, Apple has a virtual monopoly over digital music. The hardware, the sync software, and the marketplace.

Given this, it is becoming increasingly difficult for competing products to survive without offering compatibility with the dominant ecosystem that Apple has created. Props to Apple, this is a sign of your success. HOWEVER, let's consider for a moment that Apple is Microsoft and only allows Internet Explorer to function - competitor's browsers are purposely disabled by one method or another. Or even, Apple is Microsoft and they decide to disable any digital media player (yes, even the iPod) aside from their own Zune product. In either of this scenarios, there's no question that Microsoft would be in trouble, so what makes everyone here think that Apple can get away with this forever? I personally see any sort of legal action by Apple against Palm to result in large scale exposure of the anti-competitive nature of the iTunes ecosystem and an eventual disruption of the closed environment that apple (and apparently so many people here) covet so much.

Is Palm without fault? Of course not. Spoofing vendor and device ID's is bad. Bad Palm. But Apple isn't exactly in a good light here either folks..

EDIT: And by the way..calling the Pre a "dud" or "failure" is pretty dumb. Does it measure up to the incredible success of the iPhone? Of course not. No recent product has. However I'm sure most (if not all) of the people here can agree that if there was no iPhone, the Pre is the next best thing. I'd hardly call that a failure.

[Foo2]

Why wouldn't Apple sue Palm over this? Simple. Because they'd lose. Lose big.

yeah, right.:err:

Let's face it, Apple has a virtual monopoly over digital music. The hardware, the sync software, and the marketplace.
What's your evidence of Apple having a monopoly over digital music? (I don't believe there are any laws against "virtual" monopolies, by the way). Apple does have government sanctioned "monopolies" over their own hardware and software, via patents and copyrights.

Is Palm without fault? Of course not. Spoofing vendor and device ID's is bad. Bad Palm.
Exactly.

But Apple isn't exactly in a good light here either folks..
Why, because of your sour grapes?

[801]

OK, you think Jon Rubinstein got to be the CEO because he developed the Pre and said he could get it to sync up with itunes, therefore piggy backing the success of his product on Apples infrastructure,
OR,
Do you think that his success as CEO is dependent on how well he can now utilize itunes, and needs it to sync up to keep his job, and company afloat,
OR
Do you think that Apple has decided to stick its thumb in their former exective's eye by sticking it to him as fast as he can react to this un-negtotiated loophole in something he should have been able to predict,
OR
Do you think he couldn't afford to sell the Pre at its price point with an itunes license?

Bottom line,

This back and forth means his job, and Palms future.
I bet he made all sorts of promises to the board that are now biting him in the butt.

He is in a rough spot.

[RichL]

I wonder how Palm markets this.

Palm Pre: Syncs with iTunes. Sometimes. :???:

Whilst I think Apple are being minor douches in intentionally break compatibility, I don't understand why Palm doesn't go the same way as everyone else. Is it so hard to write their own app that reads the iTunes library file?

[souliisoul]

Why wouldn't Apple sue Palm over this? Simple. Because they'd lose. Lose big.

Let's face it, Apple has a virtual monopoly over digital music. The hardware, the sync software, and the marketplace.

Given this, it is becoming increasingly difficult for competing products to survive without offering compatibility with the dominant ecosystem that Apple has created. Props to Apple, this is a sign of your success. HOWEVER, let's consider for a moment that Apple is Microsoft and only allows Internet Explorer to function - competitor's browsers are purposely disabled by one method or another. Or even, Apple is Microsoft and they decide to disable any digital media player (yes, even the iPod) aside from their own Zune product. In either of this scenarios, there's no question that Microsoft would be in trouble, so what makes everyone here think that Apple can get away with this forever? I personally see any sort of legal action by Apple against Palm to result in large scale exposure of the anti-competitive nature of the iTunes ecosystem and an eventual disruption of the closed environment that apple (and apparently so many people here) covet so much.

Is Palm without fault? Of course not. Spoofing vendor and device ID's is bad. Bad Palm. But Apple isn't exactly in a good light here either folks..

EDIT: And by the way..calling the Pre a "dud" or "failure" is pretty dumb. Does it measure up to the incredible success of the iPhone? Of course not. No recent product has. However I'm sure most (if not all) of the people here can agree that if there was no iPhone, the Pre is the next best thing. I'd hardly call that a failure.

Sorry but using Internet explorer as an example is flawed every way you look at it. IE would disable other browsers that would be anti competition, since internet is not owned by MS. Apple own iTunes and Device ID, which Palm are using. Apple have every right to disable the Palm Pre, since it is using their device ID, which is no no by USB IF. Why don't Palm do what everyone esle does and develop a sync software. No its too easy to do it cheaply and then cry foul.

Sorry mate but Apple are not suing because it would raise awareness to Palm Pre, free publicity at Apple's expense. Noticed all the crying has come from Palm, wonder why.

[Tofino]

If it still identifies itself as an iPod, then Palm are really pushing it now.

However, you're forgetting that, unless Apple removed it, iTunes does sync with SOME 3rd party devices. Maybe Palm gave in and got iTunes to work with it as a Palm and not as an iPod.

Or am I giving Palm too much credit...

according this article at precentral.net

http://www.precentral.net/how-palm-re-enabled-itunes-901-sync-webos-121

the pre now identifies itself as an ipod video:

USB Product ID: 0x1209
USB Vendor ID: 0x05ac (Apple, Inc)
Manufacturer: Apple Inc.

palm is clearly in violation of their usb license, but i don't think there is much the usb board can do about it.

[Tofino]

You can protect your home and family anyway you like. But if someone breaks into my house, I'm going to shoot the bastard. :smokey:

what if it's your drunken neighbour who missed his driveway? :wow:

[Tofino]

Thanks, I was hoping someone else would suggest it ;)

How about Apple replaces all the music with Kenny G so the owner destroys their own Palm.

i think the UN would involve the human rights commission right away...:lol:

[Tofino]

How do Palm think this is going to end? Apple probably have legal agreements with their content providers as to the allowable syncing. If they can't stop them technically, they will have no choice but to sue. No choice because of their existing agreements.

i don't think that's likely the case, as you can sync with your itunes library if you use the xml file for your own software.

[Tofino]

It's still an appalling over-reaction that marks you as both a meaner and more inhuman person than the burglar is likely to be.

Personally, I like to think I'm better than the average burglar, not worse.

Let me guess? You're American? ;)

sounds klingon to me... :lol:

[Tofino]

Apple should have some code that detects the presence of a genuine Apple product over and beyond the USB check.

I will resist the temptation to suggest that then upon finding it isn't attached to a genuine Apple product it does naughty things. Nooo i would never suggest that.

i think that would also prevent all old ipods from working with itunes.

[danlNY]

However, I also love my Palm Pre. Why does Apple feel they have to keep other excellent devices from working with their ecosystem? That just plain limits choice and hurts competition and ultimately customer experience.
...
"No, no we can't let people access their paid for, DRM free music via the playlists and software they are used to. We don't want to sell them any songs or anything."
...
[Apple is] willing to lose the revenue for content that 800,000+ and increasing Palm Pre users would spend on iTunes because Stevie boy is pissed at John Rubinstein for joining Palm and Ed Collagen for turning down the "no hire" pact and hiring Apple employees.


Apple doesn't make money from selling content, Apple's profit comes from it's hardware sales. Apple develops software and sells digital content only to make their hardware more attractive to consumers, that's been their business model for a long time. Most profits made from software or digital content revenue is, for the most part, spent on keeping that infrastructure going.

Why would Apple open up their iTunes store to other hardware devices?? There's no (or very little) profit in it for them! But then they would be responsible to support other hardware manufacturer's devices!!

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/04/23/itunes_store_a_greater_cash_crop_than_apple_implie s.html

[basjhj]

EDIT: And by the way..calling the Pre a "dud" or "failure" is pretty dumb. Does it measure up to the incredible success of the iPhone? Of course not. No recent product has. However I'm sure most (if not all) of the people here can agree that if there was no iPhone, the Pre is the next best thing. I'd hardly call that a failure.

Actually, if we have to believe the numbers from the various media outlets, sales of the Palm Pre are anemic at best. As an investor, I would call that a failure.

[Mac Voyer]

It's still an appalling over-reaction that marks you as both a meaner and more inhuman person than the burglar is likely to be.

Personally, I like to think I'm better than the average burglar, not worse.

Let me guess? You're American? ;)

You must have a better class of burglar where you're from. Someone breaks into your house, you catch him in the act, and invite him to sit and have a cup of tea with you. After sharing family pictures, you work out a barter that is equitable for both parties. Here in America, catching a burglar in the act will most likely make you dead, and your family raped and killed. Where I live, you do not stop to ask if the burglar will be satisfied with just taking the Macbook, you best blow the mother fu**er into the next dimension while you still can.

For the record, I believe Palm means Apple and its family of customers no good and should be permanently put out of our misery.

[Foo2]

palm is clearly in violation of their usb license, but i don't think there is much the usb board can do about it.

I'm not sure the USB-IF needs to do anything but declare Palm to be in violation of their agreement.

That might be enough to prevent the Pre from being advertised as supporting USB. A recall and destruction of product packaging and advertising literature that declares the Pre as supporting USB might also be necessary. If Palm continued to advertise the Pre as having USB, a charge of false advertising might be brought against the company, which is where Apple could get involved directly or maybe even indirectly (and quietly) by funding legal action by the USB-IF.

Depending on the terms of the USB agreement, a flagrant violation might even prevent Palm's advertising any device they manufacture as being USB.

My vivid imagination suggests the USB agreement might further prevent component manufacturers from selling "USB" components to any manufacturer that is deemed to be in violation of the agreement. Hopefully for Palm's sake, they've figured these things out, though.

[CurtisEMayle]

...

Let me guess? You're American? ;)

No ... Republican.

[rtdunham]

You can protect your home and family anyway you like. But if someone breaks into my house, I'm going to shoot the bastard. :smokey:

I heard a talk radio show host describe how, if he'd captured a burglar at gunpoint, he'd force him to sit on the floor and he'd watch him cry and plead and maybe pee himself--and then he'd shoot him. I'm not saying that applies to you, Mac Voyer, but it said a lot about the radio host, and it IS another way of saying what you said, without maybe the intervening cruelty.

Once we're past the point we agree on--the use of force to protect yourself and your family--Is your purpose to prevent someone from stealing your Mac, and to hold him until the police get there? Is it to summarily convict and execute? What if it's the teenager from next door? A drunk? A drunk who's gone to the wrong house? Or just a stupid young punk? Where do you draw the line? And how do you live with the lines you draw? Having someone break in is gonna get the testosterone flowing in all of us, no doubt. But the decisions you make now about what you'd do, might be the ones you make without further thought in the actual event. We don't care if the burglar ends up in jail; but we don't need to lose a forum buddy for making a decision he comes to regret. I'm just sayin'...

[freddyok]

I dont see why you guys are being such a** holes, especially apple! dont get me wrong i love apple currently have a imac g4 24 inch (intel based),I 16gig iphone 3G, mac mini and a hackintosh. I dont see why apple wont let the palm pre sync with them if its not even harmful to them in any way. They (apple) should be encouraging to be able to sync with other 3rd party devices, it would only expand itunes in such a great way. I have a palm pre also and its actually a great phone especially the service unlike my 3G that cuts off in downtown dallas TX. I should have the right to choose what music program i want to use with any device not just ipods Etc. Apple needs to get its ego out of the way and grow up for a second. seriously. There company can only grow oh so much before it has to finally expand its horizons. and for this reason is why they suck.

[Gazoobee]

You must have a better class of burglar where you're from. Someone breaks into your house, you catch him in the act, and invite him to sit and have a cup of tea with you. After sharing family pictures, you work out a barter that is equitable for both parties. Here in America, catching a burglar in the act will most likely make you dead, and your family raped and killed. Where I live, you do not stop to ask if the burglar will be satisfied with just taking the Macbook, you best blow the mother fu**er into the next dimension while you still can. ...Well America is a bit more barbaric than other countries, but I think you are just being way over the top with the exaggerations here, (and just to win a petty argument with a stranger!).

For the record, I live in a drug and crime-infested area on the "bad side" of town and have lived here all my life except for when I was a kid in which case I lived in a worse area in an adjacent town. On the other hand it is Canada, so the specific volume of crime is about one tenth that of the USA. Guns are rarer here but all the serious gangs carry them and shoot each other up on a regular basis. Again, no one can match the sheer volume of weapons available to criminals in the USA, but people are pretty much the same everywhere in my experience.

Most burglars take the time to figure out when you aren't going to be home before they break in. Even in the USA, most burglars are also not killers, and most will run away when confronted, but actually confronting a burglar in your home is a really, really dumb thing to do. The oft-quoted standard movie situation where one wakes up in the middle of the night and hears someone "in the house" is exceedingly rare but even when confronted with that situation, the smart thing to do is reach for the phone, not a gun.

My point was that responding to someone stealing from you, by purposely blowing them away just so you can feel like a man, is cowardly, stupid and "over-the-top" reaction-wise.

The motivations of the average burglar are related to either poverty or drug addiction. Either way, that makes the burglar more moral than you, who apparently wants the pleasure of murdering someone simply because they "took your stuff."

Stuff is stuff. You can always get more (or similar), you can't take it with you anyway, and it's all ultimately worthless.
A life on the other hand is irreplaceable and short enough to begin with.

[masstrkiller]

You must have a better class of burglar where you're from. Someone breaks into your house, you catch him in the act, and invite him to sit and have a cup of tea with you. After sharing family pictures, you work out a barter that is equitable for both parties. Here in America, catching a burglar in the act will most likely make you dead, and your family raped and killed. Where I live, you do not stop to ask if the burglar will be satisfied with just taking the Macbook, you best blow the mother fu**er into the next dimension while you still can.

For the record, I believe Palm means Apple and its family of customers no good and should be permanently put out of our misery.

I am with you :lol: I can't imagine not protecting loved ones and my household.

The REAL world is not as nice as people think. :(

[RichL]

Actually, if we have to believe the numbers from the various media outlets, sales of the Palm Pre are anemic at best. As an investor, I would call that a failure.

iPhone sales were pretty anemic too until it went global. Let's wait until the Pre is on sale in Europe and Asia before we judge it and WebOS in general. Not that I have much confidence in Palm's ability to sell outside of North America...

[masstrkiller]

It's still an appalling over-reaction that marks you as both a meaner and more inhuman person than the burglar is likely to be.

Personally, I like to think I'm better than the average burglar, not worse.

Let me guess? You're American? ;)

I don't believe it is over reacting. When it boils down to it, The REAL world is not exactly playing nice and does not always play by the rules. When someone has broken into my home I am not about to ask him to leave. I will TELL him to leave and I will have a baseball bat or a gun at my side for the ready.

[rtdunham]

... The oft-quoted standard movie situation where one wakes up in the middle of the night and hears someone "in the house" is exceedingly rare but even when confronted with that situation, the smart thing to do is reach for the phone, not a gun...

Gazoobee, i'm on YOUR side of this OT tangent, but if i woke up in my house and heard a burglar, and if i had a gun, I'd reach for the gun and my iPhone* in that order. If the burglar got to me before the police responded, and if I felt i needed to to protect myself or my family, I'd shoot in self defense. I don't think any of us can know exactly how we'd feel in such situations, but i think i'd feel some regret, and that my moral code would then enable me to cope with that fairly easily.

It wouldn't allow me to cope with shooting someone i'd apprehended and was holding at gunpoint waiting for the police. I'd have no eagerness to shoot; sadly i sometimes sense that in others. It's almost as though they're hoping for it, so they can achieve some kind of ill-thought-out rite of passage.

There's no doubt we're influenced by books and movies and our nation's history (I'm also in U.S.) and that sometimes we resort to behavior we admired in the abstract on the part of Charles Bronson and the Dirty Harry movies et al. We're better off if we think that through a little more...

[rtdunham]

.. When someone has broken into my home I am not about to ask him to leave. I will TELL him to leave and I will have a baseball bat or a gun at my side for the ready.

I have no problem at all with your point of view (other than the username "masstrkiller"--I'm hoping you're a gamer! :) ).

For the record, I've been on the barrel-end of a handgun before. NOT as a burglar, but as a carjack victim. I was at gunpoint for maybe 15 minutes before a policeman got suspicious, followed us, stopped us, and arguably saved my life. I've thought about that night many times, and i don't think if I'd had a gun in the car it would have made the situation better, unless I had it in my hand as i drove along, and as I stopped at the light where they got me. I wasn't afraid enough to be doing that before my incident, and I didn't let it make me afraid of the world after it--just cautious. I pick up far fewer hitchhikers than i did when I was young (this incident happened before the first Apple computer*), but I'll still occasionally give a stranger a ride; I lock the doors at my house but i still answer the door. I keep a bat in my bedrooms in case I hear an intruder, but I haven't made the call yet to get a handgun. Everyone's experience and judgements will be different.

[Mac Voyer]

I keep a bat in my bedrooms in case I hear an intruder, but I haven't made the call yet to get a handgun. Everyone's experience and judgements will be different.

I presume you keep that bat handy for the purpose of doing extreme violence when it is required. It matters not whether you use a gun or a Louisville slugger. I assure you, if a crackhead breaks into your house while you and yours are having visions of sugarplums dancing in your heads, you are in imminent danger. I have read about and seen too many beautiful funerals of people who died at the hands of someone who, ostensibly, only stopped by to take the stereo.

Palm is playing the roll of a burglar in this little drama. (It's a metaphor, people.) Some are saying that Apple should do nothing while this small time thief eats away at the iPhone ecosystem a little at a time. That is INSANE! Don't like the burglar metaphor? Palm is a fly that must be swatted... to death. Perhaps if they opened up Palm Desktop, they would look a bit less hypocritical. For now, they are no better than Psystar and should be treated to the same bad death.

[TBell]

In Michigan unfortunately you'd probably go to jail. Moreover, your being sexist. I'd expect you to shoot the Bitch breaking into your house as well.

You can protect your home and family anyway you like. But if someone breaks into my house, I'm going to shoot the bastard. :smokey:

[rtdunham]

I presume you keep that bat handy for the purpose of doing extreme violence when it is required. ...

Damn straight. But if I knock the guy out, i'm not gonna proceed to beat him to death. That seemed to be the tenor of the post that started this dialogue.

I have read about and seen too many beautiful funerals of people who died at the hands of someone who, ostensibly, only stopped by to take the stereo.

Understood. And my high school buddy's dad got his gun when they were victims of a home invasion, but shot his son--my buddy's brother, and not one of the perps. That's a lot to have to live with. Maybe they'd all have survived if he hadn't gotten the gun; maybe they all would have died. Of course, our clarity is worst when we're suddenly awakened, and our conscious perceptions might even be influenced by what we've been dreaming. What if the intruder's our kid, maybe even dressed in a mask because halloween's three weeks away and kids just...do what kids do? I'll not revisit all the arguments for/against a handgun in the phone, I just haven't made up MY mind yet.

Palm is playing the roll of a burglar in this little drama. (It's a metaphor, people.)

LOL. Well done!

For the obligatory Apple-related content: the "MacBurglar" is a fast-food character, isn't he? Does that keep this post on-topic?

Seriously, on syncing, i struggled for so many years to sync Now-Up-To-Date and other app content to my macs, it's a gift today to have Mail and AB and the rest sync so nicely. If only I could get my iPhone address book to sync with the contact list on my car's bluetooth phone system. Does anyone know any make/model of car that makes that easily do-able? Do-able at all?

[krabbelen]

I am really amused by all the posts, since everyone (majority) are giving Palm a hard time because it is direct competitor of iPhone and how dare a company use Apple's code to infiltrate the iTunes.
BUt Google Voice which replaces some of the core functions of iPhone, a number of people posting here have called foul on Apple for not approving the apps.

I see no difference from what Google is doing from Palm, except Palm are being very stupid by trying to make Apple look like the bad guy...wait is that not what Google is doing as well.

Hmm double standards! maybe
I actually want Palm Pre to success, so Apple have to innovate a better iPhone for consumers and Google Voice can kiss my ass, I will use Skype.

Not at all the same thing! Google is "replacing some of the core functions of iPhone" by writing its own program. So yeah, you can "make a 'phone call'" with a Google app; and you can with Skype and Truphone and I suppose others.

Google is not hacking the iPhone so that when you go to the regular built-in phoning function and make a phone call you can do it through Google instead of your regular carrier on your SIM card account.

People are saying the Google app should be approved because the carrier should be open to competition -- that since you are already paying ATT for "unlimited data", you should be able to use your data bandwidth in this way. How is this making Apple look bad? These apps add value to the iPhone. It makes ATT service look bad. Now, if Google was trying to sell its hardware Gphone or whatever by using as a selling point that it syncs fully and smoothly with iTunes just as though it was an iPhone, I think there would be a little bit of a problem.

If Apple said, "hey we can give you Google Maps and Google search on your iPod or iPhone without the ads, because we have figured out how to hack straight into Google's servers without using their publicly released APIs, then you can bet there would be a problem!

There is no double standard, because people are calling for Palm to do the same as Google (and as Blackberry has already done with your iTunes library) -- WRITE THEIR OWN PROGRAM. Good grief, how hard is that to understand!

Palm is not only trying to access your library, which is legitimate and allowed by Apple; they are trying to take advantage of the user experience that Apple has carefully crafted and developed for its own devices. They want the automatic sync with smart playlists, and unwatched podcasts, and everything else. These are part of the selling point and differentiation of Apple's iPods and iPhones. And Palm is using Apple's uniquely assigned USB ID to achieve it.

[Brian Green]

Considering how vindictive Steve is known to be, I'm willing to bet that there'll be a security update or something coming down relatively soon that really messes with Palm. Now that they are intentionally violating USB protocol by claiming to be an iPod (after the review), Apple can take the gloves off and end it. It's just a matter of how long it'll take to find a way that makes it a permanent break for the Pre.

[MacShack]

Yep, my first post here. BTW, I have 3 Mac's and we have 5 iPods in the house. Big Palm Fanboy. lol.

"indifference of carriers?" Uh. You're smoking it. In Europe and around the world carriers have been bidding for the Pre. And as soon as an analyst said that Verizon had decided to pass on it a Verizon executive came out and said "no way! We will get it in January!" You clearly don't know what you are talking about.

Yes, I would love to see them adapt Songbird and build an Amazon Mp3 store plug-in. But spending an hour on this every couple of months is not keeping them from doing that. Maybe they are? Who knows.

But Palm does not look like a stalker to me. I think they are getting a good laugh at Apple's expense. I am.

Man you got all that? You must be a real Apple supporter. Man, you sound sad thinking that owning apple branded hardware is some sort of credential. As if anybody here cares whether you have any macs or iPods whatsoever. The only problem is that your point of view is wrong and hard to defend. No matter how many macs and iPods you have. As I read, you don't have an iPhone. Which leads me to think that you are now so much regretting you bought a pre instead of an iPhone. Which by the way, does sync with iTunes just as it should do. If I were a Pre owner I'ld be so upset. That a company who promises me synergy with my iTunes collection. But really it's just an on and off feature because they are trying to give me functionality through some other companies back door. I would say. Palm get your act together and give me a stable solution.

You might not see this. But this burglar where people keep referring to is not only Apples intruder. But also yours. They (Palm) got your money with a promise they knew they couldn't keep. They robed you. Now when Palm is not coming through for you. You still have to get your iPod and listen to that new song you just bought. Next time think different. :lol:

[Mac Voyer]

Seriously, on syncing, i struggled for so many years to sync Now-Up-To-Date and other app content to my macs, it's a gift today to have Mail and AB and the rest sync so nicely. If only I could get my iPhone address book to sync with the contact list on my car's bluetooth phone system. Does anyone know any make/model of car that makes that easily do-able? Do-able at all?

People have forgotten how serious an issue syncing data on the phone and computer used to be before the iPhone. Don't let anyone get away with saying that iTunes sync is not a big deal or a legitimate reason to choose one phone over another. As for car syncing, I suspect that Apple will one day release a version of iTunes for the car. After all, there are already iDevice docks built into cars. Who knows what the future might bring. One thing's for certain, if Palm is still in business when it happens, they will try to hack that too and claim that it is everyone's god given right to have iTunes car-sync.

[masstrkiller]

I have no problem at all with your point of view (other than the username "masstrkiller"--I'm hoping you're a gamer! :) ).

Yes I am :D

Thank you for noticing.

[treestman]

You know it *would* be like "shooting a burglar."

It would be a ridiculous over-reaction that says more about the general nastiness of the shooter than it does the burglar, and often leads to the complete destruction of everything the shooter was trying to defend in the first place.

:)

Agreed. iTunes has got along just fine with third-party devices with drag/drop and XML access to the library. It would be a huge over-reaction to stomp on all third-party devices.

Apple's beef is with Palm, since Palm is the only one hacking the system instead of using the methods Apple provides. In my view the only decent Apple response is to simply break the Pre's syncing (well, Palm's syncing, since presumably the upcoming Pixie will use it as well) in their next update. No need to do any more than that.

I do NOT believe Apple should sue Palm. Frankly, I've come to think this is what Palm is hoping for. I can't but feel they're a little desperate, and poking Apple with a stick looking for them to do something Palm can really cry about.

Palm is still hoping for public support on this. I can see why, given some of the moronic comments I've seen all over the net.

[krabbelen]

People have forgotten how serious an issue syncing data on the phone and computer used to be before the iPhone. Don't let anyone get away with saying that iTunes sync is not a big deal or a legitimate reason to choose one phone over another. As for car syncing, I suspect that Apple will one day release a version of iTunes for the car. After all, there are already iDevice docks built into cars. Who knows what the future might bring. One thing's for certain, if Palm is still in business when it happens, they will try to hack that too and claim that it is everyone's god given right to have iTunes car-sync.

Exactly. People supporting Palm in this are acting like 1) the Pre has a right to the same consideration on the Apple platform / software as an Apple product does; and 2) that this would be good for Apple.

As though it would be good for Apple to say, "hey guys, buy whatever phone you want but come and use our great software with it, because afterall, it's free. Then maybe, just maybe everyone will see what nice guys we are and buy a Mac on that basis, even though they have already demonstrated themselves to be cheapskates with delusions of entitlement."

Apple doesn't make money on iTunes, it makes money on phones and computers. Why are people buying those phones and computers? Because they offer an experience that is superior to the competition, and a real value for money because (besides quality and longer life of the product) the software bundled with them is easier to use and more productive.

If a person chooses a Pre for whatever reason (no local ATT service or something I would imagine), then they need to accept it doesn't have the advantages that an Apple phone using Apple software will have. Get over it. If a person chooses a Pre to spite Apple, then they are just cutting their own nose off and they have bigger issues than just being in the odd position of rejecting an Apple product but eagerly clamoring to get preferential treatment from Apple's free software instead.

[Rankzero]

Of course Apple would like to have their ITunes exclusive for their products! And, they may have certain right to this (according to law in most countries) but when the ITunes becomes a large monopoly (in part because they force all users of ipods/iphones to use any software you want as long as it is the slow an grand ITunes hog...) then authorities will force them to stop! Why? It is uncompetetive behaviour and illegal!

Just to be clear, I own 3 macs and an Iphone which are great things! Still I thing palm should use all the power, force and ingenuity they can muster to crack the monopolistic anti-competetive apple tactics!

Frankly Apple can take the competition whithout being a bully! BTW there is no secure solution to lock out anything (like ITunes media library) from a private computer when you have root access. If you do not want to spoof as ipod there are many other ways to rip the ITunes library. I think Apple is surely loosing the fight to google and other "open standard champions" if the continue this fight. In the end they will be forced by law and then they will look very stupid!

[fartheststar]

The missing sync apparently works with the Pre. If I had a Pre, I'd buy that. Legit way around it all. Save a headache. Maybe Palm can buy Mark/Space to save the Prez' butt.

[Mac Voyer]

Why doesn't anyone believe that BB sync software, WinMo, Zune, or Palm Desktop should be equally open to all devices? Let's dispense with the blatant hypocrisy, shall we? This is about robbing the only bank worth robbing.

[Cubert]

Palm either has big, big kahunas or no brains.

[charlituna]

palm is clearly in violation of their usb license, but i don't think there is much the usb board can do about it.

i'm sure if Palm keeps this up, the forum would think of something

[Homie]

Man, you sound sad thinking that owning apple branded hardware is some sort of credential. ....

So all my Apple stuff means nothing.

As I read, you don't have an iPhone. Which leads me to think that you are now so much regretting you bought a pre instead of an iPhone.

Because I don't have an iPhone too?

Yeah, that makes me a Palm fanboy. That makes sense.

Next time think different. :lol:

If it means thinking like you...forget it. BTW, being an Apple lemming is not thinking different. :lol:

[Cubert]

Why doesn't anyone believe that BB sync software, WinMo, Zune, or Palm Desktop should be equally open to all devices? Let's dispense with the blatant hypocrisy, shall we? This is about robbing the only bank worth robbing.

The issue is Palm's Pre using Apple's USB vendor number to trick iTunes, which is a blatant violation of the USB-F regulations. Basically, it's a hacker move - not something a legitimate company should be doing - and it's illegal. Apple allows third party devices to sync with iTunes (ex. the BlackBerry Desktop Sync Application), but for whatever reason Palm chose not to go that route. Palm is in deep $#!T here.

And, if I misunderstood your post, I apologize.

[Homie]

Why doesn't anyone believe that BB sync software, WinMo, Zune, or Palm Desktop should be equally open to all devices? Let's dispense with the blatant hypocrisy, shall we? This is about robbing the only bank worth robbing.

My friend the hypocrisy it yours. Blackberry and others use XML and on system software to sync their devices with iTunes. Palm did it better by loading the software on the Pre and getting iTunes to sync w/o a middleman on the desktop.

Apple decides to repeatedly block Palm but ignores Samsung, Blackberry, etc...

Uh, is it because Palm does it better and has a real iPhone challenger? Or is it because Steve is petty and still pissed at John?

It's probably one of those.

The Palm's syncing with iTunes doesn't hurt Apple anymore than Blackberry sync does. But Apple differentiates and treats them differently. I think that says something about Apple.

[Mac Voyer]

And, if I misunderstood your post, I apologize.

I believe you did, but no apology necessary.

[quinney]

I dont see why you guys are being such a** holes, especially apple! dont get me wrong i love apple currently have a imac g4 24 inch (intel based),I 16gig iphone 3G, mac mini and a hackintosh.

How do you like your Intel based G4?

[Hattig]

It does to me. I never seen a company with so much disregard well as respect for using another company credentials to use with their product. Palm needs to go bankrupt and close it doors forever! They have no more creativity nor originality. :no:

They're just trying to give their Apple owning users seamless support for the media application that Apple owners use.

Interoperability is the best legal argument they will have when this goes to court. Reverse engineering for the purposes of interoperability is quite legal (in progressive countries anyway) if undertaken in a specific manner.

I would expect that the law would override an ad-hoc "forum".

Regardless, Palm should have developed a media sync using the iTunes XML file and iSync or similar (like the Blackberry Sync application) by now. They have to show some attempt at doing things the friendly way instead of being aggressive, because they're aggressive like a tiny wee beastie against a raptor. They could then fight the interoperability argument from a higher moral position.

[Mac Voyer]

My friend the hypocrisy it yours. Blackberry and others use XML and on system software to sync their devices with iTunes. Palm did it better by loading the software on the Pre and getting iTunes to sync w/o a middleman on the desktop.

Apple never blocked anyone from accessing the xml files. Palm is not doing that better; they are masquerading as an iPod. That is like saying Pete's serves the same quality of espresso as Starbuck's because Pete's is using Starbuck's coffee, not just their recipe. I know, another torchered metaphor. :no:

[lostkiwi]

Of course Apple would like to have their ITunes exclusive for their products! And, they may have certain right to this (according to law in most countries) but when the ITunes becomes a large monopoly (in part because they force all users of ipods/iphones to use any software you want as long as it is the slow an grand ITunes hog...) then authorities will force them to stop! Why? It is uncompetetive behaviour and illegal!

Just to be clear, I own 3 macs and an Iphone which are great things! Still I thing palm should use all the power, force and ingenuity they can muster to crack the monopolistic anti-competetive apple tactics!

Frankly Apple can take the competition whithout being a bully! BTW there is no secure solution to lock out anything (like ITunes media library) from a private computer when you have root access. If you do not want to spoof as ipod there are many other ways to rip the ITunes library. I think Apple is surely loosing the fight to google and other "open standard champions" if the continue this fight. In the end they will be forced by law and then they will look very stupid!

@Rankzero (interesting name!). Please read the excellent post directly above yours.

Nobody is forcing you to use an iPod/iPhone. The reason so many people choose to buy that hardware is because usually they enjoy the Apple experience. The Apple Experience costs money and time to develop - it doesn't happen through magical fairies dropping it under the designers pillows each night after sun down. Frankly I cannot see why people think they are somehow entitled to enjoy the Apple Experience if they don't want to pay for its development. Please don't kid yourself - as many posters have pointed out, Apple isn't in the iTunes business to sell music, they are there to sell hardware and the software that is intricately linked to this hardware in a seamless bundle.

There are no issues of anti competitiveness here- if you don't want to use iPhones/iPods then by all means choose another hardware provider, but please don't expect us as Apple users to subsidise your experience by funding the r & d that goes into each piece of Apple hardware & software. There are plenty of other options for you *cough* Zune *cough*.

I don't mean to come across as an arsehole with an ad homimen attack as I haven't met you personally - please interpret my comments as being aimed towards the general populace. Its just so ungainly trying to write to the global 'we'.

[Mac Voyer]

Reverse engineering for the purposes of interoperability is quite legal (in progressive countries anyway) if undertaken in a specific manner.

I would expect that the law would override an ad-hoc "forum".

Which of these progressive countries is the Pre being sold?

[gobsmacked]

Of course Apple would like to have their ITunes exclusive for their products! And, they may have certain right to this (according to law in most countries) but when the ITunes becomes a large monopoly (in part because they force all users of ipods/iphones to use any software you want as long as it is the slow an grand ITunes hog...) then authorities will force them to stop! Why? It is uncompetetive behaviour and illegal!

Just to be clear, I own 3 macs and an Iphone which are great things! Still I thing palm should use all the power, force and ingenuity they can muster to crack the monopolistic anti-competetive apple tactics!

Frankly Apple can take the competition whithout being a bully! BTW there is no secure solution to lock out anything (like ITunes media library) from a private computer when you have root access. If you do not want to spoof as ipod there are many other ways to rip the ITunes library. I think Apple is surely loosing the fight to google and other "open standard champions" if the continue this fight. In the end they will be forced by law and then they will look very stupid!
Are you for real? Apple should spend their time and money developing their own software and then give it away for free? Apple makes the best product, people have freedom of choice to use them or not. If you don't like their rules then don't buy and use their products. It's that simple. Apple as a corporation is not obligated to do anything to support anything other than their own products. They are not doing anything anti-competitive or illegal. Do you even understand the meaning of those words?

[Homie]

Exactly. People supporting Palm in this are acting like 1) the Pre has a right to the same consideration on the Apple platform / software as an Apple product does; and 2) that this would be good for Apple.

What if I said "Exactly. People supporting Apple in this are acting like 1) the Mac has a right to the same consideration on the Microsoft platform / software as a PC does; and 2) that this would be good for Microsoft."

So should MS be allowed to block iTunes in PC's? Really? Should Windows automatically delete Safari? This is a dangerous argument you are making.

As though it would be good for Apple to say, "hey guys, buy whatever phone you want but come and use our great software with it, because afterall, it's free. "

That sounds like what Google, Ubuntu, ZoHo, and others are saying.. Yes, they are different companies but Apple lets others use iTunes for free...

Apple doesn't make money on iTunes, it makes money on phones and computers. Why are people buying those phones and computers? Because they offer an experience that is superior to the competition, and a real value for money because (besides quality and longer life of the product) the software bundled with them is easier to use and more productive.

I mostly agree with this although I find it very hard to believe that Apple isn't making money on iTunes. I've seen the 10k. Still don't believe it.

But you are right: they do offer an experience that is superior to the competition in most cases.. But that is no reason to be anti-competitive and lock out other products. That is not the way I want my vendors to act.

If a person chooses a Pre for whatever reason (no local ATT service or something I would imagine), then they need to accept it doesn't have the advantages that an Apple phone using Apple software will have. Get over it. If a person chooses a Pre to spite Apple, then they are just cutting their own nose off and they have bigger issues than just being in the odd position of rejecting an Apple product but eagerly clamoring to get preferential treatment from Apple's free software instead.

Uh, whose the fanboy? lol

[Hattig]

Which of these progressive countries is the Pre being sold?

It's coming to the UK soon. Anyway, I believe that the US also has such laws, but I'm not going to do the research at 2am.

[Mac Voyer]

It's coming to the UK soon. Anyway, I believe that the US also has such laws, but I'm not going to do the research at 2am.

But it is not in the UK so Palm nor you can claim that they are doing in accordance with the local laws. In this country, there is no law against making software that only works with your hardware products, like PALM DESKTOP! This is true no matter how popular the product becomes.

[Homie]

The issue is Palm's Pre using Apple's USB vendor number to trick iTunes, which is a blatant violation of the USB-F regulations. Basically, it's a hacker move - not something a legitimate company should be doing - and it's illegal. Apple allows third party devices to sync with iTunes (ex. the BlackBerry Desktop Sync Application), but for whatever reason Palm chose not to go that route. Palm is in deep $#!T here.

And, if I misunderstood your post, I apologize.

Illegal? Name the country. The USB-F publishes standards and allows companies to use their logo. If they don't want Palm to use their logo, they can send them a letter and Palm will stop. BFD.

They are not a government. They do not have any authority. Their opinion is somewhat important and I am disappointed in their stance but that does not mean Palm is doing something "illegal."

Palm is definitely not in deep S#!T here. You wish.

[Quadra 610]

MacDailyNews Take:

What a great feature Palm offers their Pre sufferers: Intermittent and unreliable iTunes syncing. This, along with near total App-Lack™, an antique mechanical keyboard perpetually stuck in vertical mode, no soft keyboard at all, a cheap plastic screen that's reportedly quite the nasty scratch magnet, and flimsy, junky-feeling overall build-quality - all backed by a company that's so running on fumes that they can't even manage to come up with their own software to legally sync with iTunes. No wonder they're having trouble selling their crappy, app-less fake iPhones.

---------------------

Spot-on.

[Homie]

MacDailyNews Take:

What a great feature Palm offers their Pre sufferers: Intermittent and unreliable iTunes syncing. This, along with near total App-Lack™, an antique mechanical keyboard perpetually stuck in vertical mode, no soft keyboard at all, a cheap plastic screen that's reportedly quite the nasty scratch magnet, and flimsy, junky-feeling overall build-quality - all backed by a company that's so running on fumes that they can't even manage to come up with their own software to legally sync with iTunes. No wonder they're having trouble selling their crappy, app-less fake iPhones.

---------------------

Spot-on.

Where can I find that? www.applefanboi.com?

[Rankzero]

@Rankzero (interesting name!). Please read the excellent post directly above yours.

Nobody is forcing you to use an iPod/iPhone. The reason so many people choose to buy that hardware is because usually they enjoy the Apple experience. The Apple Experience costs money and time to develop - it doesn't happen through magical fairies dropping it under the designers pillows each night after sun down. Frankly I cannot see why people think they are somehow entitled to enjoy the Apple Experience if they don't want to pay for its development. Please don't kid yourself - as many posters have pointed out, Apple isn't in the iTunes business to sell music, they are there to sell hardware and the software that is intricately linked to this hardware in a seamless bundle.

There are no issues of anti competitiveness here- if you don't want to use iPhones/iPods then by all means choose another hardware provider, but please don't expect us as Apple users to subsidise your experience by funding the r & d that goes into each piece of Apple hardware & software. There are plenty of other options for you *cough* Zune *cough*.

I don't mean to come across as an arsehole with an ad homimen attack as I haven't met you personally - please interpret my comments as being aimed towards the general populace. Its just so ungainly trying to write to the global 'we'.

I beg to differ!

* ITunes does not sell hardware! For any one user of an ipod there are three potential users that would buy ipods if they could use it without the stupid ITunes requirement! Just let it work as a USB mass storage device. And, lots and lots of users complain about ITunes. I think ITunes works fine but that should be up to anyone.

* Apple is making money selling music, a simple fact you can check in the quarterly reports. So the argument to only sell music from Itunes store to ipod/apple/iphone owners is discriminating and anti-competetive. You wait and se what the courts in EU will say. And the issue is about size, this apply to any shop/system once they get a large market share. What if amazon only would sell to hispanics?

* Apple does not own my media, (nor adresses, calendar events etc) that I have in my ITunes library! If I previously used ipods and was forced to use ITunes then it is my property and I can make use of it ANY WAY I WANT.

Conclusively, Apple's mobile venture is much about lock in and it is an UGLY path of keeping customer in the "hog hen" once hooked. In contrast, Apple's computer venture used to be about freedom, remembering the 1984 Mac video (most of you here do not remember that?) about how we should not be controlled and brain washed. Now it is Apple creating a IPhone App Censorship-Nanny-state!

[dm3]

according this article at precentral.net

http://www.precentral.net/how-palm-re-enabled-itunes-901-sync-webos-121

the pre now identifies itself as an ipod video:

USB Product ID: 0x1209
USB Vendor ID: 0x05ac (Apple, Inc)
Manufacturer: Apple Inc.

palm is clearly in violation of their usb license, but i don't think there is much the usb board can do about it.

Seems that the USB board could sue them as being in violation of the terms Palm agreed to when they requested a vendor ID. The USB board could revoke Palm's USB vendor ID and prevent them from making any future requests.

[Quadra 610]

Where can I find that? www.applefanboi.com?


http://www.applefanboi.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/

Apparently not.

[digitalclips]

No ... Republican.

I had been wondering, so they are not the same thing after all! :lol:

[digitalclips]

How do you like your Intel based G4?

Oh cruel :lol::lol::lol:

[Homie]

http://www.applefanboi.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/

Apparently not.

It's a joke son - ya' missed it.

- Foghorn Leghorn

[souliisoul]

I beg to differ!

* ITunes does not sell hardware! For any one user of an ipod there are three potential users that would buy ipods if they could use it without the stupid ITunes requirement! Just let it work as a USB mass storage device. And, lots and lots of users complain about ITunes. I think ITunes works fine but that should be up to anyone.

* Apple is making money selling music, a simple fact you can check in the quarterly reports. So the argument to only sell music from Itunes store to ipod/apple/iphone owners is discriminating and anti-competetive. You wait and se what the courts in EU will say. And the issue is about size, this apply to any shop/system once they get a large market share. What if amazon only would sell to hispanics?

* Apple does not own my media, (nor adresses, calendar events etc) that I have in my ITunes library! If I previously used ipods and was forced to use ITunes then it is my property and I can make use of it ANY WAY I WANT.

Conclusively, Apple's mobile venture is much about lock in and it is an UGLY path of keeping customer in the "hog hen" once hooked. In contrast, Apple's computer venture used to be about freedom, remembering the 1984 Mac video (most of you here do not remember that?) about how we should not be controlled and brain washed. Now it is Apple creating a IPhone App Censorship-Nanny-state!

You argument about Apple being anti-competitive is probably from emotional standpoint, since how can a company be anti-competitive, if you have a choice. People know the business model of Apple and you can choose to buy a Zune or some other player to listen to your music. You also have a choice to purchase songs from other electronic retail outlets, e.g. Amazon, Wal Mart etc.

So you choose to purchase a iPod or iPhone and understand that from beginning the link to iTunes and would that comes with. Now you want EU to basically tell Apple:

You MUST offer sync ability to other electronic devices, ever though YOU have a choice not use Apple's apps and hardware.

From beginning everyone knew what Apple's business model was, so I can not see how Apple are being discriminating, since consumer has a choice. Apple have no monopoly because other companies play in their market, its just Apple play better. Is that Apple's fault no and are Apple stopping companies illegally from being competitive NO.

As for your example 'What if amazon only would sell to hispanics?' very poor example actually in no way the same at what Apple is undertaking at moment.

YOU understood the consumer model, Apple was offering you when you bought the music from their store and now, you want to change their model, since it does not suit your requirements. Then go to another music store online and make a choice!

[Foo2]

Illegal? [...] that does not mean Palm is doing something "illegal."
Quite right! If anything, Palm is merely in breach of contract.

Palm is definitely not in deep S#!T here.
Not unless and until Palm is sued. Palm might be found liable for damages and assessed an even greater punitive fine for flagrantly breaching their contract. No biggie.;)

[souliisoul]

Not at all the same thing! Google is "replacing some of the core functions of iPhone" by writing its own program. So yeah, you can "make a 'phone call'" with a Google app; and you can with Skype and Truphone and I suppose others.

Google is not hacking the iPhone so that when you go to the regular built-in phoning function and make a phone call you can do it through Google instead of your regular carrier on your SIM card account.

People are saying the Google app should be approved because the carrier should be open to competition -- that since you are already paying ATT for "unlimited data", you should be able to use your data bandwidth in this way. How is this making Apple look bad? These apps add value to the iPhone. It makes ATT service look bad. Now, if Google was trying to sell its hardware Gphone or whatever by using as a selling point that it syncs fully and smoothly with iTunes just as though it was an iPhone, I think there would be a little bit of a problem.

If Apple said, "hey we can give you Google Maps and Google search on your iPod or iPhone without the ads, because we have figured out how to hack straight into Google's servers without using their publicly released APIs, then you can bet there would be a problem!

There is no double standard, because people are calling for Palm to do the same as Google (and as Blackberry has already done with your iTunes library) -- WRITE THEIR OWN PROGRAM. Good grief, how hard is that to understand!

Palm is not only trying to access your library, which is legitimate and allowed by Apple; they are trying to take advantage of the user experience that Apple has carefully crafted and developed for its own devices. They want the automatic sync with smart playlists, and unwatched podcasts, and everything else. These are part of the selling point and differentiation of Apple's iPods and iPhones. And Palm is using Apple's uniquely assigned USB ID to achieve it.

Others have shown why some of your opinions are not faultless, but just add this:

Why is Apple not approving the app and requesting Google to make it web based app, similarly to Skype. If Google Voice and Skype were the same would not Apple approve the app?

[Chris_CA]

Nothing syncs with iTunes. Companies can access the xml data and create their own solutions, but not directly with iTunes.
Sure they can & do.
Creative Nomad, SonicBlue Rio RioVolt, Nike psa Play, Nakamichi Soundspace and the Motorola Razr all sync directly with iTunes, not the .xml.

[Rot'nApple]

Apple needs to buy Sprint...

Gets rid of Pre... and others

Updates the Now Network to the iPhone Network. Edge, 3G, 4G International GSM bands so all versions of all iPhones can work here in the states. So if you purchased your iPhone in Europe and travel to America, your covered! A cellular carrier dedicated to one theme, the iPhone, iPod Touch, Tablet, Laptops, also helps eliminating bottlenecks, dropped calls, lost voice mails etc. on other networks that have multiple company product lines for limited bandwidth.

Ties MobileMe into the iPhone Network. Apple creates any necessary apps that allow users to view what they created on their Mac, uploaded to MobileMe, and have available at anytime for the iPhone and other Apple related products (tablet, iPod Touch, Laptops).

Ends exclusivity agreement and contract in total with AT&T. Offers one time rebate of iPhone users on AT&T, jailbroken phones, hacked phones and of course, owners of Pre...

No more ITMS hacking by Palm... :grumble:

[Chris_CA]

i love apple currently have a imac g4 24 inch (intel based),
Really? Intel made PPC G4 chips for Motorola? I did not know that.
I dont see why apple wont let the palm pre sync with them if its not even harmful to them in any way.
Apple wrote the software (iTunes). Palm could very easily write their own software to sync if they wanted. Nokia has already done it with Nokia Multimedia Transfer.

[MJ Web]

according this article at precentral.net

http://www.precentral.net/how-palm-re-enabled-itunes-901-sync-webos-121

the pre now identifies itself as an ipod video:
After reading Pre Central I have not only concluded Palm is disgraceful -- I conclude Palm Pre users are pathetic!

[Chris_CA]

So the argument to only sell music from Itunes store to ipod/apple/iphone owners is discriminating and anti-competetive.
What? You don't need in iPod, iPhone or Apple hardware to purchase and listen to music or movies from iTunes store.

[lostkiwi]

I beg to differ!

* ITunes does not sell hardware! For any one user of an ipod there are three potential users that would buy ipods if they could use it without the stupid ITunes requirement! Just let it work as a USB mass storage device. And, lots and lots of users complain about ITunes. I think ITunes works fine but that should be up to anyone.

I never said 'iTunes sells hardware'. That would be ludicrous - "..why yes I bought my PC from Windows..." Please read my response carefully before commenting. You can use the iPod as a mass storage device. It is called Disk Mode. Look it up.
Also you don't have to use iTunes to use your iPod if you choose not to. There are alternatives. http://www.downloadsquad.com/2007/11/08/itunes-alternatives/
I looked at them and chose to use iTunes to manage my iPod as I felt it was best.
* Apple is making money selling music, a simple fact you can check in the quarterly reports. So the argument to only sell music from Itunes store to ipod/apple/iphone owners is discriminating and anti-competetive. You wait and se what the courts in EU will say. And the issue is about size, this apply to any shop/system once they get a large market share. What if amazon only would sell to hispanics?
I never said that Apple doesn't make some money selling music. I implied that it was not their primary focus. There is a difference! "So the argument to only sell music from Itunes store to ipod/apple/iphone owners is discriminating and anti-competetive" Do you even know what you are saying? There is nothing anti competitive here. If you bought music on Amazon it will work fine on your iPod. There are other e-stores as well. You can bring music (CD etc) into iTunes from many sources. Or even into other iPod software alternatives. Please explain to me where the anticompetitiveness is?? "What if amazon only would sell to hispanics?" What are you talking about? Where the heck do hispanics come into this discussion? I do not live anywhere near North, South or Central America. Please keep to the subject at hand.

* Apple does not own my media, (nor adresses, calendar events etc) that I have in my ITunes library! If I previously used ipods and was forced to use ITunes then it is my property and I can make use of it ANY WAY I WANT.
Good for you. You can use your iPod to do anything you want. Paperweight, ship anchor - I don't care, and neither does Apple. Once again, no one is tying you to a table and forcing you to use iTunes, iPods or anything else for that matter. Perhaps you would be better off with a Zune. Or a Pre. Whatever.

Conclusively, Apple's mobile venture is much about lock in and it is an UGLY path of keeping customer in the "hog hen" once hooked. In contrast, Apple's computer venture used to be about freedom, remembering the 1984 Mac video (most of you here do not remember that?) about how we should not be controlled and brain washed. Now it is Apple creating a IPhone App Censorship-Nanny-state!
Conclusively? Wrong adverb my friend. Lock in is a very emotive term. A lot like Nanny State. Once again, please keep to the subject at hand and try to use terms that are contextually appropriate. if you want a mobile with data, in most countries you have to have a data contact for a period of time. Facts of life, mate. If you don't want a contract then get an iPod touch. Apples computer venture is about making products (not just computers!) that people want to use. It is also about making money. How do you justify using another companies product (iTunes) on your product without any recompense towards Apples R & D? Isn't that theft? Are you going to pay for these costs with your colossal sense of entitlement? I don't think so.
How about Palm create their own software solution? They certainly have the freedom to do that.

*sigh* Look mate, I have no intention of engaging in a war of words with you.
If you want to use an iPod, great. Use whatever software you want.
I'm going to get offline for a while and smell some air that has not previously been through my laptop. Later.

[blur35mm]

[QUOTE=Let me guess? You're American? ;)[/QUOTE]

That's the problem with non-Americans. They don't understand the concept of "Right to bear arms" to defend and protect yourself. Originally this was put in to ensure American citizens had the right to defend their homeland from foreign aggressors such as Britain. Unfortunately, today it now means the right to defend your home, property and livelihood because of criminal scum that want to steal, rape, and kill your family and children.

I am glad I am allowed to own a weapon and protect my family. Gun safety is TAUGHT in my household.

Read up on the citizens of this country that saved lives by being allowed to have a concealed carry permit, or saved their families and prevented further tragedy from criminal minds.

Liberals and anti-gun twinkie loving countries can kiss my a$$. Oh, and so can PALM. They are rotting. This recent dilution is a smokescreen for their inevitable demise (demise = being bought by MSFT)

[ThinkKnot]

Palm should just somehow sub-license the ID for the Motorola ROKR so it'll be an allowed device on iTunes. Or is the ROKR still alive somehow?

[CurtisEMayle]

Liberals and anti-gun twinkie loving countries can kiss my a$$.

I rest my case, your Honor.

[jcsegenmd]

I didn't pore over everyone's comments; just wanted to add my two cents. I do know of two people who are ecstatic with their Pres, good for them. That said, PALM is unlikely to last much longer. It is deep in the hole, has had to go for a second or third round of funding; anyone lucky enough to have bought PALM as the bottom of the market should get out now. Once iPhone hits other carriers, the Pre will be toast, Apple's repeated disabling of iTunes will be be enough for the first-gen of Pre owners to discourage others. Pre will be an RIP in two years, Motorola in 3 and RIMM in four

[krabbelen]

What if I said "Exactly. People supporting Apple in this are acting like 1) the Mac has a right to the same consideration on the Microsoft platform / software as a PC does; and 2) that this would be good for Microsoft."

So should MS be allowed to block iTunes in PC's? Really? Should Windows automatically delete Safari? This is a dangerous argument you are making.



Apple doesn't delete Palm desktop sync or a million other programs that COMPANIES WRITE FOR THEMSELVES. As far as I know, there are thousands of third-party programs (many of them from hardware vendors) that you can freely download and install FROM APPLE'S OWN OS X DOWNLOAD page. See how easy Apple makes that. Apple are way more open in this regard, puhlease. And Apple don't cripple any of these just because they can. Mac fans like myself use many of these third-party titles in preference to Apple's own equivalent software. The competition is encouraged.

There is evidence that iTunes and Safari are a more little restricted than they should be on Windows.

Regardless, MS sure does limit what third-party software can do. Can iTunes and WMV interoperate fully in every way? Can you use iTunes to do everything that you want to with your Zune? What ever happened to Plays For Sure and all of MS' partners? I am sure they are real fans of MS right now. MS stabbed them in the back and went for a Zune only solution. MS would love to delete or restrict a lot more than they currently do, but they have been sued five ways till Tuesday over the years. Restricting and deleting and corrupting is MS SOP.

The OS is a platform on which you are supposed to be allowed to run third-party software using the open standards it supports (there are more of these on Mac OS X). Third parties are supposed to write programs using these open standards and the public APIs supplied by the OS owner. That doesn't mean you automatically get a free pass to hack into core services or piggy-back on someone else's software.

Think about this: what if iTunes was not created by Apple, who also happen to have created the OS as well? What if Creative or someone wrote iTunes? Would we even be having this discussion? Creative would make it sync seamlessly with their players. If someone else like Palm mooched off their software, you can bet there would be issues. If HP or Epson wrote superior scanning or printing software, should the other company whine that the software doesn't run their printers and scanners just as seamlessly. I just don't get it! Be careful what you are arguing here, because pretty soon no-one will want to put any effort into writing good software -- they will be forced to let the competition use it as their own.

[SGSStateStudent]

After reading Pre Central I have not only concluded Palm is disgraceful -- I conclude Palm Pre users are pathetic!

You praising them?

[bobmarleypeople]

Sure they can & do.
Creative Nomad, SonicBlue Rio RioVolt, Nike psa Play, Nakamichi Soundspace and the Motorola Razr all sync directly with iTunes, not the .xml.

I made this point several pages ago, but no one paid any attention.

[hill60]

Double

[Rankzero]

You argument about Apple being anti-competitive is probably from emotional standpoint, since how can a company be anti-competitive, if you have a choice.

If you know something about law you would see this is a very ignorant comment. There are a number of ways you can be anti-competetive according to law and still offer (some) freedom to customers.


Now you want EU to basically tell Apple:

You MUST offer sync ability to other electronic devices, ever though YOU have a choice not use Apple's apps and hardware.


I never said that! The part of using anti-competitive practices, is about not making *extra efforts* to block competition, which is the case here. Palm made an effort, small but still, made the effort, to let consumers use their music etc, which users rightfully own after spending money i ITunes Store. To block this is by part of the definition anti-competetive.


YOU understood the consumer model, Apple was offering you when you bought the music from their store and now, you want to change their model, since it does not suit your requirements. Then go to another music store online and make a choice!


Yes, **I** did understand! This is not about me but about the average consumer. I know I can hack the ITunes library if I want and export all contents. I also only own IPhone so there is no need. I would never buy a Pre. This is not about Pre. It is about freedom and anti-competetive practices.

But, this is the key thing, when the average consumer "buys" music from ITunes then he/she is not "buying" in the generally accepted meaning of the word. The property rights are greatly diminished due to the low utility implemented by Apple thinking in the long term. A lot of consumers are not informed of this. As a side note, the EULA is over 100 pages long and completely invalid nonsense under many EU-countries law. This could only have been written by ignorant US lawyers.

[hill60]

Yes it's obvious that iTunes is a monopoly, there's no way that another piece of software could be more prevalent. take Windows Media Player, it's got nowhere near the market pene...

..oh, hang on.

The Palm pre has no respect for USB standards so why should Apple?

If Apple wanted to run 110 volts down USB to a spoofed iPod why should anyone stop them.

The USB-IF guidelines are obviously meaningless to Palm, why should they care?

btw your contacts, calendar etc are synced with the pre-existing software on your computer, iTunes even gives you a choice of which one to use.

you don't need iTunes to sync that information to another device.

[iReality85]

Just a thought: Since my iPhone 3G has ongoing issues syncing with the iTunes 64-bit version for Vista (which Apple still as not corrected as of yet), and results in (but not limited to) corrupted album artwork, songs skipping, and software updates freezing, maybe owning the Palm Pre to sync with iTunes wouldn't be so bad...

[hill60]

Apple is entitled to protect it's software from devices spoofing USB Identities to gain access, in the same way a bank is entitled to prevent someone from gaining access to an ATM by spoofing someone else's card ID.

This is not "blocking competition" it is stopping fraudulent (i.e. obtaining a benefit by deception) activity by Palm.

Access to purchased songs is not blocked by using legitimate means i.e. writing software to interface with your device and iTunes.


I never said that! The part of using anti-competitive practices, is about not making *extra efforts* to block competition, which is the case here. Palm made an effort, small but still, made the effort, to let consumers use their music etc, which users rightfully own after spending money i ITunes Store. To block this is by part of the definition anti-competetive.

It's not about "hacking" the iTunes library, many companies write software to use iTunes with their devices e.g. Nokia, Blackberry, Motorola etc

Yes, **I** did understand! This is not about me but about the average consumer. I know I can hack the ITunes library if I want and export all contents. I also only own IPhone so there is no need. I would never buy a Pre. This is not about Pre. It is about freedom and anti-competetive practices.

iTunes is acting as an agent in order to sell material WHERE THE COPYRIGHTS ARE HELD BY OTHERS, as such they have to respect the legal requirements of the copyright holders.

If you think the EU has a different, more open approach to this, I suggest you look into The Pirate Bay, and what is happening to the owners in the courts of Sweden.

But, this is the key thing, when the average consumer "buys" music from ITunes then he/she is not "buying" in the generally accepted meaning of the word. The property rights are greatly diminished due to the low utility implemented by Apple thinking in the long term. A lot of consumers are not informed of this. As a side note, the EULA is over 100 pages long and completely invalid nonsense under many EU-countries law. This could only have been written by ignorant US lawyers.

[patrickwalker]

Illegal? Name the country. The USB-F publishes standards and allows companies to use their logo. If they don't want Palm to use their logo, they can send them a letter and Palm will stop. BFD.


Think about it, if an observant consumer looks at the packaging, they may not see that it is USB compatible. "How does this connect to my computer?"


They are not a government. They do not have any authority. Their opinion is somewhat important and I am disappointed in their stance but that does not mean Palm is doing something "illegal."


They are in violation of the contract they signed to become a member of the USB Consortium. Violations of contractual law is still very much illegal. I'm no expert, but could this also be a violation of the DCMA?

The big question is what is the USB Consortium going to do? This is the first time someone has spoofed another company's assigned ID that I've ever heard of. What's the precident? How to proceed?

Playing the David vs Goliath won't work for Palm on this issue, which is why their argument before the USB-IF failed miserably.

Palm is toast. If you have any stock in it, sell it now.

[gabberattack]

This whole battle seems like a losing proposition for Palm. Imagine if you bought an iphone and every week or couple of weeks it stopped syncing with your media. Eventually it gets fixed, but sooner or later it stops syncing again. This happens over and over. Regardless of who is right and who is wrong, eventually, I'd get tired of this and look for alternate solutions. Even if palm re-enables sync every time, I'd still be pissed if I was a pre user and couldn't get new media onto my phone for a few days or a few weeks every time itunes blocked it. Maybe I"d find some kind of third party software, like the missing sync, or maybe I would go for a new phone. If I went for a new phone, I doubt I'd get the new pre (whatever it was at the time I upgraded), as I know that this hassle is going to continue.

If you won't update iTunes every time new version releases you are fine with Pre.

[Rankzero]

I never said 'iTunes sells hardware'.

Rightly so, and thus It was not a quote. Nevertheless, you said 'Apple isn't in the iTunes business to sell music, they are there to sell hardware and the software...' which i was alluding to.

I still claim freeing ipods from ITunes would sell more ipods! And, freeing ITunes from ipods would sell more music! I do not understand that you all, "Palm-bashers", cannot see that whatever Apple argues, it is illegal (anti-trust law) to sell one using the freeness of the other. A very known case of this is the Netscape / IE battle with tie-in to Windows. Remember?

"So the argument to only sell music from Itunes store to ipod/apple/iphone owners is discriminating and anti-competetive" Do you even know what you are saying? There is nothing anti competitive here. If you bought music on Amazon it will work fine on your iPod. There are other e-stores as well.
Sorry, I put the "only" in the wrong place. The intended meaning was "sell music from Itunes store *only to* ipod/iphones". I know you can buy CDs etc and use with ipods. That is all good.

How do you justify using another companies product (iTunes) on your product without any recompense towards Apples R & D? Isn't that theft? Are you going to pay for these costs with your colossal sense of entitlement? I don't think so.

How about Palm create their own software solution? They certainly have the freedom to do that.


Firstly, as I stated above, you are not allowed to give away things free under any terms. Thus if Apple, unlawfully does this then this "recompense" problem is about charging (more than free) for ITunes and balancing with charging less for hardware/music. When it comes to Apple's income, it is also very hard to argue they will earn less returns of ITunes efforts, by excluding potential customers from the store.

About hispanics, I do not care where you live. The hypothetical case was just a general example that should make the absurdity clear of selecting customers to block to any store when there is no extra effort to let them in!

I agree the censorship issue, relating to App Store arbitrary rejection powers, is off topic but it fits right in with Apple's unproportionate control behaviour. Again, check the "why 1984"-video and you will know a different Apple! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8

[souliisoul]

If you know something about law you would see this is a very ignorant comment. There are a number of ways you can be anti-competetive according to law and still offer (some) freedom to customers.



I never said that! The part of using anti-competitive practices, is about not making *extra efforts* to block competition, which is the case here. Palm made an effort, small but still, made the effort, to let consumers use their music etc, which users rightfully own after spending money i ITunes Store. To block this is by part of the definition anti-competetive.



Yes, **I** did understand! This is not about me but about the average consumer. I know I can hack the ITunes library if I want and export all contents. I also only own IPhone so there is no need. I would never buy a Pre. This is not about Pre. It is about freedom and anti-competetive practices.

But, this is the key thing, when the average consumer "buys" music from ITunes then he/she is not "buying" in the generally accepted meaning of the word. The property rights are greatly diminished due to the low utility implemented by Apple thinking in the long term. A lot of consumers are not informed of this. As a side note, the EULA is over 100 pages long and completely invalid nonsense under many EU-countries law. This could only have been written by ignorant US lawyers.

If I knew something about the law, please enlighten us with a factual evidence of what you are stating, since I am ignorant. You better make sure you provide a link. Btw We are talking EU law correct?
Make sure it shows that Apple are being anti-competitive, since that what your opinion is.

[piot]

Of course Apple would like to have their ITunes exclusive for their products! And, they may have certain right to this (according to law in most countries) but when the ITunes becomes a large monopoly (in part because they force all users of ipods/iphones to use any software you want as long as it is the slow an grand ITunes hog...) then authorities will force them to stop! Why? It is uncompetetive behaviour and illegal!


Still I thing palm should use all the power, force and ingenuity they can muster to crack the monopolistic anti-competetive apple tactics!

(emphasis added)

Is iTunes a monopoly? Serious question.

Up until a couple of years ago iTunes was designed to sync with just Portable Media Players, namely iPods. Today iTunes can also sync with media playing cell phones, namely the iPhone and occasionally the Palm Pre.

In order for a product to be deemed a monopoly, you first have to define the relevant market. So what is the market? I guess it would be 'software that syncs a computer to a portable media device'.

So....
How many MP3 players or PMP's DON'T use iTunes to sync with a computer.
How many media capable "smart" phones DON'T use iTunes to sync.
How many media capable NON "smart" phones DON'T use iTunes to sync.

In the US, every year, are there MORE PMPs and cell phones sold that are NOT Apple products... or LESS?

How many computers have Windows Media Player installed?
How many computers have iTunes installed?

In the end they will be forced by law and then they will look very stupid!

Are you absolutely sure about that?

[Mac Voyer]

Is iTunes a monopoly? Serious question.

Of course iTunes/Apple is a monopoly. They have a monopoly on awesome software that even the most die-hard haters want to have. :lol:

[Rankzero]

If I knew something about the law, please enlighten us with a factual evidence of what you are stating, since I am ignorant. You better make sure you provide a link. Btw We are talking EU law correct?
Make sure it shows that Apple are being anti-competitive, since that what your opinion is.

In the case of Palm/Apple it would be US Anti-trust law but EU law could be applicable too. I suggest you start by reading about anti-trust law. Wikipedia has a general introduction.

Particularly study the Tying chapter for EU Article 82:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_82#Tying
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Microsoft_competition_case
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft

The issue to Apple ITunes is about being the "Dominant" in IPods and "tying" both markets of "selling music" and secondary "selling PC music players" (which of course every one does for free) to the first.

[Celemourn]

what if it's your drunken neighbour who missed his driveway? :wow:

shooting a burglar is not necessarily equivalent to 'shoot first, ask questions later'. I find it rather comforting that, despite the hyperbole, most gun owners are keenly aware of the consequences of an unjustified killing: They go to prison. American law generally does not give a blank check to violent defense of one's home, but neither does it force people to decide between going to prison and (for example) being raped or murdered by an intruder. Reason USUALLY wins the day. Despite the very visible exceptions.

Case in point: A college student recently confronted an intruder in his garage. The intruder lunged for the student, who defended himself with a sword he had brought with him to investigate the noises. The intruder's hand was severed, and he suffered 'severe lacerations' to the chest. He died at the scene. It was discovered that the intruder was a long time offender, with many convictions for violent crimes. However, despite the fact that the student acted in self defense against a known criminal who was a real threat, the local prosecutor's office declined to initially RULE OUT filing charges against him. They wanted a thorough investigation done before they decided. Reason wins.

C

[souliisoul]

In the case of Palm/Apple it would be US Anti-trust law but EU law could be applicable too. I suggest you start by reading about anti-trust law. Wikipedia has a general introduction.

Particularly study the Tying chapter for EU Article 82:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_82#Tying
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Microsoft_competition_case
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft

The issue to Apple ITunes is about being the "Dominant" in IPods and "tying" both markets of "selling music" and secondary "selling PC music players" (which of course every one does for free) to the first.

I have cut and paste the quote (see below), so everyone can read it and understand that this guy is using factual evidence, which does not supports is opinions, actually their explain, he does not understand the law.

So how does Apple have monopoly and abuse their dominance in market, since I do not want to put words in your mouth, but you have used this quote. They have not stopped anyone from syncing with their iTunes library, you must write your own program, as someone has stated there are choices too many for consumers.

P.S. Maybe just maybe your the one that is ignorant of the law and using laws you do not understand or know how to interrupt. Lastly please show us how your last 2 links are similarly to what Apple is undertaking in marketplace, since I like to see how you choose to link the two situations using those factual evidence.

I personally think, you do not know what you are talking about and it is simple, PALM or anyone had a case against APPLE, it would be in Courts by now, very simple.


Article 82 of the Treaty establishing the European Community is aimed at preventing undertakings who hold a dominant position in a market from abusing that position. Its core role is the regulation of monopolies, which restrict competition in private industry and produce worse outcomes for consumers and society. It is the second key provision, after Article 81, in EC competition law. The text of Article 82 provides the following,
“ (1) Any abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position within the common market or in a substantial part of it shall be prohibited as incompatible with the common market insofar as it may affect trade between Member States."
(2) Such abuse may, in particular, consist in:
(a) directly or indirectly imposing unfair purchase or selling prices or other unfair trading conditions;
(b) limiting production, markets or technical development to the prejudice of consumers;
(c) applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;
(d) making the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts.

[Hookoa]

The back-and-forth battle between Palm and Apple continues, as the Pre's webOS has been updated to once again sync with iTunes, in spite of a USB-IF statement against the practice. (snip)

This will resolve itself when Apple starts getting a percentage of sales of the Pre.
But, that is not likely as it "may" impact sales of iPhone/iPods.

Some kind of "monetary" incentive "might" change the situation.

[Celemourn]

I have no problem at all with your point of view (other than the username "masstrkiller"--I'm hoping you're a gamer! :) ).

For the record, I've been on the barrel-end of a handgun before. NOT as a burglar, but as a carjack victim. I was at gunpoint for maybe 15 minutes before a policeman got suspicious, followed us, stopped us, and arguably saved my life. I've thought about that night many times, and i don't think if I'd had a gun in the car it would have made the situation better, unless I had it in my hand as i drove along, and as I stopped at the light where they got me. I wasn't afraid enough to be doing that before my incident, and I didn't let it make me afraid of the world after it--just cautious. I pick up far fewer hitchhikers than i did when I was young (this incident happened before the first Apple computer*), but I'll still occasionally give a stranger a ride; I lock the doors at my house but i still answer the door. I keep a bat in my bedrooms in case I hear an intruder, but I haven't made the call yet to get a handgun. Everyone's experience and judgements will be different.

Anecdote by the instructor for the concealed weapons safety class I took (mandatory before getting a ccw, here in Michigan): The instructor asked one of his gung-ho students, 'Lets suppose you have your pistol with you, and as you're walking through a dark alley, someone jumps out of the shadows, points a gun at you, and demands your money. What do you do?' The student responded, 'I'd pull out my gun and shoot him!' The instructor immediately corrected the foolish student, 'No, you'd give him your money. Because he can pull the trigger a hell of a lot faster than you can draw.' The moral of the story is that just because you have the tool to defend yourself, you won't always be able to use it. Discretion is still necessary.

C

[Rankzero]

Is iTunes a monopoly? Serious question.


I used unprecise language. It does not have to be a monopoly, but when you have a dominant market share, you have special obligations in both US and EU law.


So what is the market? I guess it would be 'software that syncs a computer to a portable media device'.

You are correct to point this out. It is very dependent on what is considered a separate market. The market where Apple rules is, as everyone know, the ipods. So the tying practice that can anti-competetive is connecting things to ipods. Like Itunes store/app store etc. Also now the size of the market "internet music selling" business of Apple is also looking dominant in terms of market share. So tying products like ipods back to ITunes is also anti competetive.


So....
How many MP3 players or PMP's DON'T use iTunes to sync with a computer.
How many media capable "smart" phones DON'T use iTunes to sync.
How many media capable NON "smart" phones DON'T use iTunes to sync.

In the US, every year, are there MORE PMPs and cell phones sold that are NOT Apple products... or LESS?

How many computers have Windows Media Player installed?
How many computers have iTunes installed?


You are right about these critical questions and again in a case it would be about defining "markets" and "dominant" players according to Apple's och Palm's views. In my view and the rest of the industry it *is* without doubt Apple that is the incumbent, looking at ipods and the universe around them! Palm's "hook" only proves this position. Otherwiser it would not be worth the effort.

A parallel that puts Apple Iphone on the other side of the bench is Exchange servers in corporations. Here Microsoft it the clear incument and they could try to block the connection to competitions clients but it will get them into court in no time.


Are you absolutely sure about that?

Of course not. But I think Apple will grow (because of good engineering) and then case becomes more clear. And I think Apple, we, and the world would gain if all systems were more open. Let all PMPs buy music and sync trough Itunes store/itunes. Let all ipods/iphones have open synch interface to allow any software to interoperate on Mac/Windows/Linux/etc.

[I. Pod MacNut]

This is exactly the thought I was having. Does Palm really think they are helping their clients? If I had a Pre, why would I sync with iTunes knowing I was going to have unreliable access?

[patrickwalker]

In the case of Palm/Apple it would be US Anti-trust law but EU law could be applicable too. I suggest you start by reading about anti-trust law. Wikipedia has a general introduction.

Particularly study the Tying chapter for EU Article 82:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_82#Tying
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Microsoft_competition_case
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft

The issue to Apple ITunes is about being the "Dominant" in IPods and "tying" both markets of "selling music" and secondary "selling PC music players" (which of course every one does for free) to the first.

You can try to compare apples to oranges (no pun intended), but there are many glaring differences that make such a comparison problematic.

The first, is that Apple isn't barring people from entering the market by using restrictive distribution agreements with other parties in the market. Microsoft used it's clout to strongarm OEMs from adding competing software on their products. Apple does not tell Dell to not put Windows Media Player on their Windows products and to only put iTunes on. It would be interesting to know if the reverse may be true. That MS discourages Dell and others like Acer from adding iTunes to their machines now that MS is desperately trying to push it's crappy Zune player again.

Apple also hasn't been introducing quirks in its software to prevent interoperability, things like AARP code, which "broke" Windows 3.0 from running on top of competing DR-DOS. And saying that checking the USB IDs for valid units and preventing synching with fakers is not the same as what Microsoft did.

You can have a monopoly in US or even EU law, it's when you abuse it when it antitrust becomes necessary. And the case against Apple has a long way to go in this regard, no matter how many people try to spin it. That's something even MS boosters fail to comprehend.

[Quadra 610]

From Daring Fireball:

http://hunter.pairsite.com/blogs/20091004/

Craig Hunter nails it:

"Clearly, other companies know how to sync painlessly with iTunes music (see RIM’s Blackberry Media Sync for example), so why doesn’t Palm develop a syncing solution for their own hardware? The exact reason is unknown, but my guess is that it’s a combination of things. Perhaps Palm doesn’t have the resources to develop their own sync app. Or maybe they want some publicity. Or maybe they just want to push Apple’s buttons. Who really knows.

But I seriously question the strategy and brains of any company that ties critical product capabilities to the unsupported use of their competitor’s software. I mean, really? Can it get any more ridiculous? Can you possibly send a more mixed, less confidence- inspiring, “we’re a bunch of hacks who can’t provide our own sync software for our products” message to customers?"

Indeed.

[Celemourn]

Apple never blocked anyone from accessing the xml files. Palm is not doing that better; they are masquerading as an iPod. That is like saying Pete's serves the same quality of espresso as Starbuck's because Pete's is using Starbuck's coffee, not just their recipe. I know, another torchered metaphor. :no:

actually, I think that one qualifies as an analogy, rather than metaphor (or simile!). :D

C

[Mac Voyer]

actually, I think that one qualifies as an analogy, rather than metaphor (or simile!). :D

C

I stand corrected.:) The point still stands. Palm is saying that they have a sync solution that is just as good as Apple's... because it IS Apple's!

[patrickwalker]

From Daring Fireball:

http://hunter.pairsite.com/blogs/20091004/

Craig Hunter nails it:

"Clearly, other companies know how to sync painlessly with iTunes music (see RIM’s Blackberry Media Sync for example), so why doesn’t Palm develop a syncing solution for their own hardware? The exact reason is unknown, but my guess is that it’s a combination of things. Perhaps Palm doesn’t have the resources to develop their own sync app. Or maybe they want some publicity. Or maybe they just want to push Apple’s buttons. Who really knows.

But I seriously question the strategy and brains of any company that ties critical product capabilities to the unsupported use of their competitor’s software. I mean, really? Can it get any more ridiculous? Can you possibly send a more mixed, less confidence- inspiring, “we’re a bunch of hacks who can’t provide our own sync software for our products” message to customers?"

Indeed.

I'd have to agree that it's ridiculously easy to do it on Mac OS. The question is how hard would it be for making one on Windows.

Personally, Palm can send me a Pre and I'll write them a nice simple Mac OS one. :)

[Rankzero]

So how does Apple have monopoly and abuse their dominance in market, since I do not want to put words in your mouth, but you have used this quote. They have not stopped anyone from syncing with their iTunes library, you must write your own program, as someone has stated there are choices too many for consumers.

Short answer: Itunes Music Store has a dominant market share of over 70% and they refuse to sell music to Palm Pre and any other brand.

Longer:
In fact there is evidence pointing to that they did stop the synching! First, Palm had a proceedure which did not spoof vendor ID. Apple changes something so it stopped working. Then Palm spoofed the vendor.

But I can also agree that if there are good open interfaces to ITunes then Palm could use that. I doubt there is. If so this is merely a discussion of methods.


P.S. Maybe just maybe your the one that is ignorant of the law and using laws you do not understand or know how to interrupt. Lastly please show us how your last 2 links are similarly to what Apple is undertaking in marketplace, since I like to see how you choose to link the two situations using those factual evidence.

I personally think, you do not know what you are talking about and it is simple, PALM or anyone had a case against APPLE, it would be in Courts by now, very simple.

I may be ignorant of many things. And the law is for courts to interpret. But the Microsoft vs Commision case is a direct application of Article 82 and I think it is analogous. Microsoft tied Media player into dominant Windows, and Apple ties dominant online "music selling" into ipods. I may be wrong but I think industry knows that Apple/Itunes/App Store is the dominant player and you do too. Itunes Store has more than 70% of download music market.

[Mac Voyer]

Short answer: Itunes Music Store has a dominant market share of over 70% and they refuse to sell music to Palm Pre and any other brand.


Are you drunk? Palm Pre users can purchase as much iTunes music as they like, just like they can from Amazon. They can drag in onto the Pre and listen to it as they wish. If you want all the advantages of an iPhone, you will just have to buy an iPhone. This is so hysterical, I will quote it again.

Short answer: Itunes Music Store has a dominant market share of over 70% and they refuse to sell music to Palm Pre and any other brand.


Palm has done a great job at brainwashing.

Short answer: Itunes Music Store has a dominant market share of over 70% and they refuse to sell music to Palm Pre and any other brand.


Does this propaganda appear in the box of the Pre, or do you have to go into special clinics to have it done?

Short answer: Itunes Music Store has a dominant market share of over 70% and they refuse to sell music to Palm Pre and any other brand.

[spliff monkey]

Of course Apple would like to have their ITunes exclusive for their products! And, they may have certain right to this (according to law in most countries) but when the ITunes becomes a large monopoly (in part because they force all users of ipods/iphones to use any software you want as long as it is the slow an grand ITunes hog...) then authorities will force them to stop! Why? It is uncompetetive behaviour and illegal!

Just to be clear, I own 3 macs and an Iphone which are great things! Still I thing palm should use all the power, force and ingenuity they can muster to crack the monopolistic anti-competetive apple tactics!


You obviously know nothing about monopolies; Look it up. Apple developed the software, Apple built the device, there is no law that has or ever will state that they have to provide support for 3rd party devices at all.

Apple has made it clear that you can access Itunes XML database (open standard) using your own software. Protecting your patents is anti-competitive? Really? Don't you understand that beating out the competition is what companies do?

[souliisoul]

Short answer: Itunes Music Store has a dominant market share of over 70% and they refuse to sell music to Palm Pre and any other brand.

Longer:
In fact there is evidence pointing to that they did stop the synching! First, Palm had a proceedure which did not spoof vendor ID. Apple changes something so it stopped working. Then Palm spoofed the vendor.

But I can also agree that if there are good open interfaces to ITunes then Palm could use that. I doubt there is. If so this is merely a discussion of methods.



I may be ignorant of many things. And the law is for courts to interpret. But the Microsoft vs Commision case is a direct application of Article 82 and I think it is analogous. Microsoft tied Media player into dominant Windows, and Apple ties dominant online "music selling" into ipods. I may be wrong but I think industry knows that Apple/Itunes/App Store is the dominant player and you do too. Itunes Store has more than 70% of download music market.

interesting you reply to me, but forget that patrickwalker shows how bad your opinions are with concern to the evidence provided, so please explain how his opinions are inaccurate because he did a very good job in my eyes and what i wanted to say.

Btw: You told me I was ignorant of the law initially and implied that you knew it better!! so now do not not reply, the law is for courts to interpret.

If you had just provided your opinions without using the 'personal touch' of calling me ignorant, I would have let your comments go, since everyone has an opinion, but you decided that you knew best, which is not the case.

Patrickwalker said it best

'You can have a monopoly in US or even EU law, it's when you abuse it when it antitrust becomes necessary. And the case against Apple has a long way to go in this regard, no matter how many people try to spin it. That's something even MS boosters fail to comprehend.'

P.S. again provide evidence that Apple intentionally stopped Palm Pre from syncing with iTunes and it was not deemed a hack. I am not taking you at face value anymore, factual evidence please!

[Quadra 610]

We kinda knew Palm was Bush-league from the start, what with Elevation Partners keeping it a hairs-breadth away from certain death.

But really, this latest move by Palm proves it.

I swear it really seems Rubinstein is still working for Apple. Otherwise the grudge he might hold against his former employers has driven him quite insane.

The real nail in the Palm coffin here is the lack of precedent for what they're doing (because what they are doing to their brand and to their customers is insane) and the existence of overwhelming evidence for alternative sync methods: RIM has found a way, and there are other methods to sync as well. But Palm wants to give users the "full iTunes experience", which they did not create and have no rights to. Insane.

[Rankzero]

Are you drunk? Palm Pre users can purchase as much iTunes music as they like, just like they can from Amazon. They can drag in onto the Pre and listen to it as they wish. If you want all the advantages of an iPhone, you will just have to buy an iPhone. This is so hysterical, I will quote it again.



Palm has done a great job at brainwashing.



Does this propaganda appear in the box of the Pre, or do you have to go into special clinics to have it done?
I never have or owned a Pre! I own an Iphone! You are right and my statement is wrong, you can buy and use on other things - now, if you buy non-DRM and pay extra. So if you can drag it what is so good about not allowing a synch routine work for all players?

[souliisoul]

Short answer: Itunes Music Store has a dominant market share of over 70% and they refuse to sell music to Palm Pre and any other brand.

Longer:
In fact there is evidence pointing to that they did stop the synching! First, Palm had a proceedure which did not spoof vendor ID. Apple changes something so it stopped working. Then Palm spoofed the vendor.

But I can also agree that if there are good open interfaces to ITunes then Palm could use that. I doubt there is. If so this is merely a discussion of methods.



I may be ignorant of many things. And the law is for courts to interpret. But the Microsoft vs Commision case is a direct application of Article 82 and I think it is analogous. Microsoft tied Media player into dominant Windows, and Apple ties dominant online "music selling" into ipods. I may be wrong but I think industry knows that Apple/Itunes/App Store is the dominant player and you do too. Itunes Store has more than 70% of download music market.

I never have or owned a Pre! I own an Iphone! You are right and my statement is wrong, you can buy and use on other things - now, if you buy non-DRM and pay extra. So if you can drag it what is so good about not allowing a synch routine work for all players?

Please stop you are giving me brain acne, just to read your continued search to be right. You are shown to be inaccurate in your opinions. Its okay to have opinions and it is okay to be wrong in your opinions, since we all are not prefect and know everything. What is hard to understand is someone that has been provided evidence that his opinions are wrong and continues down the path to try and enlighten us.

Are you a politician by any chance :rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Rankzero]

Btw: You told me I was ignorant of the law initially and implied that you knew it better!! so now do not not reply, the law is for courts to interpret.

If you had just provided your opinions without using the 'personal touch' of calling me ignorant, I would have let your comments go, since everyone has an opinion, but you decided that you knew best, which is not the case.


Sorry for the personal attack, but assuming you didn't know (much) about anti-competetive law, it was not ment as one. I simply wanted to state that there's more to anti-competetive law than offering choice. As you and Patrickwalker both may agree with.

There may be a long way before there is a clear case against Apple but I and many other Apple consumers can clearly *feel* their anti-competetive behaviour. In the computer market, Apple plays a different game of being underdog and promoting open standards (html 5 etc). I guess I wish to see more of that.

[Foo2]

Palm wants to give users the "full iTunes experience", which they did not create and have no rights to. Insane.

Me thinks Jon Rubenstein isn't really in charge and it's DVD Jon instead.

[halfyearsun]

It's still an appalling over-reaction that marks you as both a meaner and more inhuman person than the burglar is likely to be.

Personally, I like to think I'm better than the average burglar, not worse.

Let me guess? You're American? ;)

let me guess...you've never been robbed?

Well America is a bit more barbaric than other countries, but I think you are just being way over the top with the exaggerations here, (and just to win a petty argument with a stranger!).

Most burglars take the time to figure out when you aren't going to be home before they break in. Even in the USA, most burglars are also not killers, and most will run away when confronted, but actually confronting a burglar in your home is a really, really dumb thing to do.

My point was that responding to someone stealing from you, by purposely blowing them away just so you can feel like a man, is cowardly, stupid and "over-the-top" reaction-wise.


You make a lot of generalizations about burglars. The fact is, when one is in your house, it's dark, you can't take time to assess what they're after, their psycology, or their armament.

do you also criticize policemen for taking body shots instead of shooting the leg?

the fact is, in high stress situations, you do whatever you can to neutralize the target. sure most burglars fall into the categories you state, but there are some that don't fit that mold. take that risk if you want, but you don't subdue a burglar until the police come, you don't chase them out. you simply have no idea what they're capable of.

and you're making a logical fallacy by putting words into his mouth. all he said was he shoots a burglar that comes into his home. you've extrapolated that by assigning machismo motives and calling him a coward. bad form.

Damn straight. But if I knock the guy out, i'm not gonna proceed to beat him to death. That seemed to be the tenor of the post that started this dialogue.



I beg to differ. you were reading far too much into the "tenor" of the post that started this. the guy simply compared bricking a pre to "shooting a burglar." nothing about killing, murder, death, sadism, or anything that others are assigning to him.

Finally, i find gazoobee's rank nationalism to be appalling; claiming that america is a bit more barbaric than other countries is absolutely indefensible and cannot be backed up by anything other than biased opinion. perpetuating american stereotypes in that manner is arrogant, prejudiced, and shows a lack of education and understanding, not just about americans, but about the world in general. the fact that such stereotypes accuse americans of arrogance yet depend on arrogance themselves, shows that such character traits are not american tendencies, they are human tendencies.

remember when english colonists accused native americans of being barbarians, then proceeded to nearly eliminate them? there is meaning behind the phrase "takes one to know one."

in simplest terms, you're just as much a prick as the people you deign to accuse of the same.

[Mac Voyer]

I never have or owned a Pre! I own an Iphone! You are right and my statement is wrong, you can buy and use on other things - now, if you buy non-DRM and pay extra. So if you can drag it what is so good about not allowing a synch routine work for all players?

Since you own an iPhone, you know what it is to have a seamless sync experience between all your important data on you computer and your phone. Before the iPhone, there was no such experience. You have come to take it for granted. Companies like Palm would kill for that experience. Clearly, they are willing to steal and risk their reputation for it. iTunes sync is a HUGE deal. Let no one tell you otherwise.

[Rankzero]

Please stop you are giving me brain acne, just to read your continued search to be right. You are shown to be inaccurate in your opinions. Its okay to have opinions and it is okay to be wrong in your opinions, since we all are not prefect and know everything. What is hard to understand is someone that has been provided evidence that his opinions are wrong and continues down the path to try and enlighten us.

Are you a politician by any chance :rolleyes::rolleyes:

This turns into semantics it seems. Facts can be wrong and I will easy admit if I am wrong about facts. Opinions are subjective and cannot be wrong.

I do now know the facts of what exactly Apple did or Palm did but I *believe* Apple made a deliberate change to disable the sync with Palm pre. My opinion *is* that this is bad practice of Apple, which is enterly subjective and no thing has been presented that makes me change my view. Everyone can, as you say, have their opinon.

[souliisoul]

This turns into semantics it seems. Facts can be wrong and I will easy admit if I am wrong about facts. Opinions are subjective and cannot be wrong.

I do now know the facts of what exactly Apple did or Palm did but I *believe* Apple made a deliberate change to disable the sync with Palm pre. My opinion *is* that this is bad practice of Apple, which is enterly subjective and no thing has been presented that makes me change my view. Everyone can, as you say, have their opinon.

Just one simple reply 'opinions can be wrong'

[Rankzero]

Since you own an iPhone, you know what it is to have a seamless sync experience between all your important data on you computer and your phone. Before the iPhone, there was no such experience. You have come to take it for granted. Companies like Palm would kill for that experience. Clearly, they are willing to steal and risk their reputation for it. iTunes sync is a HUGE deal. Let no one tell you otherwise.

Here, I agree with you completely -- except for one thing-- which is just a annecdotal twist in the Palm/Apple discussion, the "Before the iPhone, there was no such experience" is not on the spot. Did you se the original first Palm Pilot with the Hotsync software? It was the first 1996.

[souliisoul]

Sorry for the personal attack, but assuming you didn't know (much) about anti-competetive law, it was not ment as one. I simply wanted to state that there's more to anti-competetive law than offering choice. As you and Patrickwalker both may agree with.

There may be a long way before there is a clear case against Apple but I and many other Apple consumers can clearly *feel* their anti-competetive behaviour. In the computer market, Apple plays a different game of being underdog and promoting open standards (html 5 etc). I guess I wish to see more of that.

Oh well you keep *feeling* that way and I will wait for the appropriate commission or government to actually show me by law that is the case.

[souliisoul]

Here, I agree with you completely -- except for one thing-- which is just a annecdotal twist in the Palm/Apple discussion, the "Before the iPhone, there was no such experience" is not on the spot. Did you se the original first Palm Pilot with the Hotsync software? It was the first 1996.

Unfortunately that was only released on windows (windows 95, windows 3.1) v2 of desktop sync software supported windows 98 and NT. No Mac version was released until much latter. I never bought one for that reason.

Actually just thinking about it name a phone that does have seamless sync experience before iPhone release across Mac/Win platforms.

[solipsism]

This turns into semantics it seems. Facts can be wrong and I will easy admit if I am wrong about facts. Opinions are subjective and cannot be wrong.
Oh yeah?! If I state, “I believe that the world is flat.” all that would be true in this example is my belief that the world is flat, but my ‘opinion’ is not free from scrutiny or being infallible simply because I state it as my opinion.

I do now know the facts of what exactly Apple did or Palm did but I *believe* Apple made a deliberate change to disable the sync with Palm pre. My opinion *is* that this is bad practice of Apple, which is enterly subjective and no thing has been presented that makes me change my view. Everyone can, as you say, have their opinon.
Then learn the facts! This has been discussed since before the Pre was launched, back when Palm advertised Pre syncing with iTunes.

Yes, Apple is deliberately changing the iTunes app so that non-iPods aren’t showing up in iTunes with false USB IDs, including Apple's USB Vendor ID, Product ID, Manufacturer ID, and even false iPod serial numbers. You think this is good for Palm’s customers to be treated this way when Apple has gone out of their way to make the iTunes file and DB very open and well documented so that any PMP can connect and sync the contents of the iTunes folders and info? RiM has a great app for syncing with the well documented and open iTunes XML file written in plain text. Apple could have encrypted this if they were going to be asses about it, but they didn’t, but you think they need to go that extra mile and support the Palm Pre in iTunes and to abolish the idea that a device shouldn’t pretend to be another device. Let’s go back to the part where you stated, "I do now know the facts”. Perhaps now you’ll do a little research before posting your opinions.

[Quadra 610]

Opinions don't have much to do with "right" and "wrong." But they have a lot to do with "informed" and "uninformed."

[piot]

I used unprecise language. It does not have to be a monopoly, but when you have a dominant market share, you have special obligations in both US and EU law.

I think the term in US law is "Market Power". Everyone tends to think of "monopoly" in terms of Microsoft's 90% or 95%. Market power or dominance is enough to get a company into trouble. I don't believe there is a finite 'number' that has to be passed. The courts decide that.


The market where Apple rules is, as everyone know, the ipods. So the tying practice that can anti-competetive is connecting things to ipods.

I think that is a mistake. One cannot define the market as "iPods". A few years ago you might have been able to define the market as "portable MP3 players. After video... maybe "Portable Media Players". Now the market is "portable media players including media capable phones". That was the whole idea behind my previous post.

Also now the size of the market "internet music selling" business of Apple is also looking dominant in terms of market share.

Although this adds another layer of complexity to the matter It may or may not be relevant. Just one example: The Palm Pre has an Amazon MP3 Store client on the phone itself! I think Palm would have a tough sell trying to prove that not having access to iTunes denied their customers access to digital music.


You are right about these critical questions and again in a case it would be about defining "markets" and "dominant" players according to Apple's och Palm's views. In my view and the rest of the industry it *is* without doubt Apple that is the incumbent, looking at ipods and the universe around them!

The rest of the industry? What do you mean Microsoft with the Zune and Windows Mobile? Rim and Blackberrys? Nokia, Sony Erricsson, Carrier branded phones, Creative, Samsung, HTC, Archos, Motorola, San Disc, Cowan and many more...?

There are hundreds of personal media products, from dozens of other vendors. Cumulatively (even in the US) their sales outweigh sales of all iPods and iPhones. None of them appear to "need" iTunes to work properly. Indeed a large number of them seem to sync with Windows Media Player. Perhaps WMP is the 'incumbent"?

NOTE: Even if you want to define the market in your "own terms" Apple's share of ANY market in Europe is not the same as in the US. Sales of all of Apple's product lines have a heavy slant to north America.

For Apple to get into ant-trust legal difficulties a number of criteria have to be met.

One has to define the market(s)
Does Apple have market power?
Are they abusing that power?
Are there insurmountable "barriers to entry" to the market?
(ie. how hard is it for Rim to build and sell cell phones and computer sync software? How hard is it for Amazon, Real, Napster and eMusic to build MP3 stores? ... and Microsoft to build a complete iTunes/iPod clone ecosystem?)


But I think Apple will grow (because of good engineering) and then case becomes more clear.

You appear to be backtracking.

.... monopolistic anti-competetive apple tactics....

Does Apple have that market power now and are they abusing it? Or is this going to happen at some future date?



And I think Apple, we, and the world would gain if all systems were more open. Let all PMPs buy music and sync trough Itunes store/itunes. Let all ipods/iphones have open synch interface to allow any software to interoperate on Mac/Windows/Linux/etc.

I was obviously mistaken. I thought you wanted more competition. Not less.

[Mac Voyer]

Here, I agree with you completely -- except for one thing-- which is just a annecdotal twist in the Palm/Apple discussion, the "Before the iPhone, there was no such experience" is not on the spot. Did you se the original first Palm Pilot with the Hotsync software? It was the first 1996.

I know about Hotsync. IMO, there is no way the experience is the same as iTunes. Also, there is the little matter of Hotsync being a proprietary Palm solution for devices running the PalmOS. Palm's understanding that a proprietary sync solution should be open to all comers, is a very new epiphany.

[newbee]

You know it *would* be like "shooting a burglar."

It would be a ridiculous over-reaction that says more about the general nastiness of the shooter than it does the burglar, and often leads to the complete destruction of everything the shooter was trying to defend in the first place.

:)

Note to all burglars ... you are hereby invited to "visit" the premises of this posters home ... no penalty required. :wow:

[newbee]

lol. You guys are cracking me up!

No, Apple is not contractually bound by "their content providers" to keep music off other devices. lol

It's funny that you take such offense to a very minor hack on an Apple product yet you guys are so proud of your jailbroken iPwone or Touch. Just tell me that none of you have thought about jailbreaking.

I love my ipod and my Macbook. Apple does a great job making excellent products to use inside their ecosystem.

However, I also love my Palm Pre. Why does Apple feel they have to keep other excellent devices from working with their ecosystem? That just plain limits choice and hurts competition and ultimately customer experience.

"No, no! We can't have an alternative dialer or video app on the iPhone!"

"No, no we can't let people access their paid for, DRM free music via the playlists and software they are used to. We don't want to sell them any songs or anything."

Apple is being very petty about this. They are willing to lose the revenue for content that 800,000+ and increasing Palm Pre users would spend on iTunes because Stevie boy is pissed at John Rubinstein for joining Palm and Ed Collagen for turning down the "no hire" pact and hiring Apple employees.

Personally, I don't care if iTunes syncs with my Pre. I have a Nano for music. But it takes Palm an hour to fix every time and show exactly what type of a company Apple is every time they break it.

Who is the petty company here? Apple for sure. Palm is just poking them in the ribs and laughing. As they should.


--- BTW, if Apple were to intentionally brick a Pre they would be sued big time. The only way to do this would be to write some nasty code that wipes the ROM. Big, big lawsuit. And that brings me to another point. You folks say "Apple should just sue Palm." That's fine. And then Apple can quit using Palm intellectual property and you can lose you ringer switch functionality and all of your PIM syncing with your desktops. Yeah, Palm has patents on all that stuff. I didn't see them suing Apple. Maybe they are just a little more willing to compete and a little more consumer friendly. eh?


Tell you what ... why don't you spend your time and money to develop something that everyone wants and is willing to pay for only to watch the guy down the street hack it and put it on his device to start making money for himself instead ... then let's see if you're still so so willin to "share".

[newbee]

Why wouldn't Apple sue Palm over this? Simple. Because they'd lose. Lose big.

Let's face it, Apple has a virtual monopoly over digital music. The hardware, the sync software, and the marketplace.

Given this, it is becoming increasingly difficult for competing products to survive without offering compatibility with the dominant ecosystem that Apple has created. Props to Apple, this is a sign of your success. HOWEVER, let's consider for a moment that Apple is Microsoft and only allows Internet Explorer to function - competitor's browsers are purposely disabled by one method or another. Or even, Apple is Microsoft and they decide to disable any digital media player (yes, even the iPod) aside from their own Zune product. In either of this scenarios, there's no question that Microsoft would be in trouble, so what makes everyone here think that Apple can get away with this forever? I personally see any sort of legal action by Apple against Palm to result in large scale exposure of the anti-competitive nature of the iTunes ecosystem and an eventual disruption of the closed environment that apple (and apparently so many people here) covet so much.

Is Palm without fault? Of course not. Spoofing vendor and device ID's is bad. Bad Palm. But Apple isn't exactly in a good light here either folks..

EDIT: And by the way..calling the Pre a "dud" or "failure" is pretty dumb. Does it measure up to the incredible success of the iPhone? Of course not. No recent product has. However I'm sure most (if not all) of the people here can agree that if there was no iPhone, the Pre is the next best thing. I'd hardly call that a failure.

You just don't get it , do you... Apple is NOT keeping iTunes away from all users that don't own an Apple product .. check out how many windows users using iTunes. They just get, rightfully so, pissed off with companies who are too lazy to develop their own software for doing so and instead try to "trick" their device into thinking it's an iPod to work properly .... I'm starting to believe that all these Palm supporters are the same people who think that it's completely and morally right to pirate other peoples work! ... unless, of course, it's YOUR work that's getting stolen!

[newbee]

what if it's your drunken neighbour who missed his driveway? :wow:



At least he wouldn't be drinking and driving any more. :lol:

[newbee]

I beg to differ!

* ITunes does not sell hardware! For any one user of an ipod there are three potential users that would buy ipods if they could use it without the stupid ITunes requirement! Just let it work as a USB mass storage device. And, lots and lots of users complain about ITunes. I think ITunes works fine but that should be up to anyone.

* Apple is making money selling music, a simple fact you can check in the quarterly reports. So the argument to only sell music from Itunes store to ipod/apple/iphone owners is discriminating and anti-competetive. You wait and se what the courts in EU will say. And the issue is about size, this apply to any shop/system once they get a large market share. What if amazon only would sell to hispanics?

* Apple does not own my media, (nor adresses, calendar events etc) that I have in my ITunes library! If I previously used ipods and was forced to use ITunes then it is my property and I can make use of it ANY WAY I WANT.

Conclusively, Apple's mobile venture is much about lock in and it is an UGLY path of keeping customer in the "hog hen" once hooked. In contrast, Apple's computer venture used to be about freedom, remembering the 1984 Mac video (most of you here do not remember that?) about how we should not be controlled and brain washed. Now it is Apple creating a IPhone App Censorship-Nanny-state!

I was going to respond to your post but after re-reading it I now realize there are no words stupid enough for you to understand so I won't!

[newbee]

In the case of Palm/Apple it would be US Anti-trust law but EU law could be applicable too. I suggest you start by reading about anti-trust law. Wikipedia has a general introduction.

Particularly study the Tying chapter for EU Article 82:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_82#Tying
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Microsoft_competition_case
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft

The issue to Apple ITunes is about being the "Dominant" in IPods and "tying" both markets of "selling music" and secondary "selling PC music players" (which of course every one does for free) to the first.



Yea, for sure. .... Wikipedia is the FIRST place to look for the legal interpretation of all laws ... I understand the supreme court judges use it extensively. :lol:

[hill60]

Will the EU make my iPhone work with Nokia's "Comes with Music" service?

In the case of Palm/Apple it would be US Anti-trust law but EU law could be applicable too. I suggest you start by reading about anti-trust law. Wikipedia has a general introduction.

Particularly study the Tying chapter for EU Article 82:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_82#Tying
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Microsoft_competition_case
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft

The issue to Apple ITunes is about being the "Dominant" in IPods and "tying" both markets of "selling music" and secondary "selling PC music players" (which of course every one does for free) to the first.

[Kishan]

iTunes consists of three distinct parts:

1. An online store where one can purchase media. All music on this store is now DRM free and may be played on a large variety of media devices.

2. A "jukebox" app for managing media from a variety of sources, only one of which is the online music store.

3. A synchronization app for Apple media devices.

I would argue that parts 1 and 2 are open to anyone on the Mac or Windows platform. It is only the third part which is in contention. Persons may purchase on the iTunes store and then move the media to any jukebox/synchronization app they choose. I would argue that Palm has chosen to not provide its users with this app, instead relying on Apple to provide it. As such, they have placed their users experience in the hands of a company that sells competing hardware! Does this seem like a silly business practice to anyone else?

[Quadra 610]

iTunes consists of three distinct parts:

1. An online store where one can purchase media. All music on this store is now DRM free and may be played on a large variety of media devices.

2. A "jukebox" app for managing media from a variety of sources, only one of which is the online music store.

3. A synchronization app for Apple media devices.

I would argue that parts 1 and 2 are open to anyone on the Mac or Windows platform. It is only the third part which is in contention. Persons may purchase on the iTunes store and then move the media to any jukebox/synchronization app they choose. I would argue that Palm has chosen to not provide its users with this app, instead relying on Apple to provide it. As such, they have placed their users experience in the hands of a company that sells competing hardware! Does this seem like a silly business practice to anyone else?

+1

Palm's handling of #3 represents an egregious assault on their own customers' use of the product. It's a critical feature that is controlled and matained by the competition, who has every right to break it or otherwise frustrate its use on Palm's device. Smooth move, Palm, smooth move. The Pre is tanking already and now they pull this stupid stunt.

[nikon133]

This whole battle seems like a losing proposition for Palm. Imagine if you bought an iphone and every week or couple of weeks it stopped syncing with your media. Eventually it gets fixed, but sooner or later it stops syncing again. This happens over and over. Regardless of who is right and who is wrong, eventually, I'd get tired of this and look for alternate solutions. Even if palm re-enables sync every time, I'd still be pissed if I was a pre user and couldn't get new media onto my phone for a few days or a few weeks every time itunes blocked it. Maybe I"d find some kind of third party software, like the missing sync, or maybe I would go for a new phone. If I went for a new phone, I doubt I'd get the new pre (whatever it was at the time I upgraded), as I know that this hassle is going to continue.

No, not really. Pre user simply has to delay iTunes update until there is Pre firmware that supports new iTunes.

Beside iPhone/iPod specific features (which are not applicable to Pre anyway), there ain't that much reasons to jump on new iTunes anyway.

[parky]

Of course Apple would like to have their ITunes exclusive for their products! And, they may have certain right to this (according to law in most countries) but when the ITunes becomes a large monopoly (in part because they force all users of ipods/iphones to use any software you want as long as it is the slow an grand ITunes hog...) then authorities will force them to stop! Why? It is uncompetetive behaviour and illegal!

Just to be clear, I own 3 macs and an Iphone which are great things! Still I thing palm should use all the power, force and ingenuity they can muster to crack the monopolistic anti-competetive apple tactics!

Frankly Apple can take the competition whithout being a bully! BTW there is no secure solution to lock out anything (like ITunes media library) from a private computer when you have root access. If you do not want to spoof as ipod there are many other ways to rip the ITunes library. I think Apple is surely loosing the fight to google and other "open standard champions" if the continue this fight. In the end they will be forced by law and then they will look very stupid!

Go and read the definition of Monopoly.
There are MANY other players and places to purchase music and ways to get that music on to the player. Therefore Apple do NOT have a monopoly as you have a massive choice.

[parky]

Yes it's obvious that iTunes is a monopoly, there's no way that another piece of software could be more prevalent. take Windows Media Player, it's got nowhere near the market pene...

..oh, hang on.

The Palm pre has no respect for USB standards so why should Apple?

If Apple wanted to run 110 volts down USB to a spoofed iPod why should anyone stop them.

The USB-IF guidelines are obviously meaningless to Palm, why should they care?

btw your contacts, calendar etc are synced with the pre-existing software on your computer, iTunes even gives you a choice of which one to use.

you don't need iTunes to sync that information to another device.

iTunes is NOT a monopoly.
You can buy music from many places on the internet all of which will play on your iPod.

[jfanning]

Since you own an iPhone, you know what it is to have a seamless sync experience between all your important data on you computer and your phone. Before the iPhone, there was no such experience. You have come to take it for granted. Companies like Palm would kill for that experience. Clearly, they are willing to steal and risk their reputation for it. iTunes sync is a HUGE deal. Let no one tell you otherwise.

You missing some words there, it should be "Before the iPhone, there was no such experience on the Mac.". And even then, it isn't true, iSync is seamless...

[Mac Voyer]

You missing some words there, it should be "Before the iPhone, there was no such experience on the Mac.". And even then, it isn't true, iSync is seamless...

I had a PC back in the day as well as Hotsync. iTunes is far and away better than HS on its best day. iSync is better than HS on its best day. If iTunes was not the best of breed, Palm would not be staking everything on it. They are risking everything for iTunes, not HS, not Palm Desktop.

If you doubt how important iTunes sync is, just visit the Precentral.net site. Some openly admit they bought the Pre because it could sync using iTunes. This is a big deal and a big moment in tech history. Can't wait to see how it ends.

[Quadra 610]

No, not really. Pre user simply has to delay iTunes update until there is Pre firmware that supports new iTunes.

The average Pre user won't realize this. Unless of course Palm advises them not to in an advisory e-mail. I'd love to read their explanation.

[souliisoul]

[QUOTE=Rankzero;1492886]Short answer: Itunes Music Store has a dominant market share of over 70% and they refuse to sell music to Palm Pre and any other brand.

Longer:
In fact there is evidence pointing to that they did stop the synching! First, Palm had a proceedure which did not spoof vendor ID. Apple changes something so it stopped working. Then Palm spoofed the vendor.


Are you going to provide the evidence to above statement, since you used the word 'fact'!

[Kabe]

...is from Craig A. Hunter:
http://hunter.pairsite.com/blogs/20091004/


Bottomline:

- there is no "iTunes" lock-in. This is what Palm want's us to think, but In fact, there is a public and documented iTunes API that is used by a number of competitors.

- Palm is doing itself not a favor by demonstrating that they are not capable to do what others have done, and tying themselves to sneaky use competitors software



While I think that Apple easily could sue them, why should they? It feels as shady as it is to disguise your "iPod-Killer" as an iPod. Using your competitors name to identify your device certainly is enough to get drawn to court for a number of legal reasons.

IMO it shows quite some desperation, and I think that they go belly-up before a court could rule on that matter.

Kabe

[tawilson]

I'm not sure the USB-IF needs to do anything but declare Palm to be in violation of their agreement.

That might be enough to prevent the Pre from being advertised as supporting USB. A recall and destruction of product packaging and advertising literature that declares the Pre as supporting USB might also be necessary. If Palm continued to advertise the Pre as having USB, a charge of false advertising might be brought against the company, which is where Apple could get involved directly or maybe even indirectly (and quietly) by funding legal action by the USB-IF.

Depending on the terms of the USB agreement, a flagrant violation might even prevent Palm's advertising any device they manufacture as being USB.

My vivid imagination suggests the USB agreement might further prevent component manufacturers from selling "USB" components to any manufacturer that is deemed to be in violation of the agreement. Hopefully for Palm's sake, they've figured these things out, though.

Well said sir. I believe it is the case that, if you want to be able to sport the various USB logos and and say you are USB compliant etc., you have to abide by the specification, otherwise your right to use the logos can be revoked.

[tawilson]

So should MS be allowed to block iTunes in PC's? Really? Should Windows automatically delete Safari? This is a dangerous argument you are making.

No, as the effective controller of the computing market, Microsoft cannot do this. Because of it's dominant position (and the openness of the platform from a third-party perspective) they have to play by different rules.

Microsoft have made there dominant position by allowing ALL third-party software run on Windows. They have no legal way to block software, as this would be anti-competitive (especially if the software competed with something of theirs).

[ChiA]

I wonder, did Palm actually approach Apple to make some contractual agreement to use iTunes?
There are other non-Apple devices which can sync with iTunes but Apple has come to a business agreement with those manufacturers.

I thought of a method with which Apple can block out the Pre syncing - release firmware updates for the iPods which the Pre imitates, then make the next iTunes sync only with those iPods with that firmware version. The Pre, unable to run iPod firmware, will be left out in the cold.

[souliisoul]

Not at all the same thing! Google is "replacing some of the core functions of iPhone" by writing its own program. So yeah, you can "make a 'phone call'" with a Google app; and you can with Skype and Truphone and I suppose others.

Google is not hacking the iPhone so that when you go to the regular built-in phoning function and make a phone call you can do it through Google instead of your regular carrier on your SIM card account.

People are saying the Google app should be approved because the carrier should be open to competition -- that since you are already paying ATT for "unlimited data", you should be able to use your data bandwidth in this way. How is this making Apple look bad? These apps add value to the iPhone. It makes ATT service look bad. Now, if Google was trying to sell its hardware Gphone or whatever by using as a selling point that it syncs fully and smoothly with iTunes just as though it was an iPhone, I think there would be a little bit of a problem.

If Apple said, "hey we can give you Google Maps and Google search on your iPod or iPhone without the ads, because we have figured out how to hack straight into Google's servers without using their publicly released APIs, then you can bet there would be a problem!

There is no double standard, because people are calling for Palm to do the same as Google (and as Blackberry has already done with your iTunes library) -- WRITE THEIR OWN PROGRAM. Good grief, how hard is that to understand!

Palm is not only trying to access your library, which is legitimate and allowed by Apple; they are trying to take advantage of the user experience that Apple has carefully crafted and developed for its own devices. They want the automatic sync with smart playlists, and unwatched podcasts, and everything else. These are part of the selling point and differentiation of Apple's iPods and iPhones. And Palm is using Apple's uniquely assigned USB ID to achieve it.

Interesting reply, but why has Vonage been approved on iPhone http://www.macworld.com/article/143130/2009/10/vonage_app.html and Google Voice not been approved as yet?

[krabbelen]

...So if you can drag it what is so good about not allowing a synch routine work for all players?

"Synch routines" are allowed. Palm can write as many as they like. They can go crazy with it. They can show us how creative they really are. Many posters are saying they could write a synch routine. The XML file is right there. Couldn't be easier.

Maybe you are asking what is so good about Apple not allowing seamless integration with other hardware from within iTunes? I guess that really is the question here, isn't it? That's what we have been discussing for five pages.

Most of you many posts seem to be about how bad it is of Apple not to let Palm masquerade its Pre's as iPods, and how good it would be for Apple to allow others to use their creativity without any effort or licensing. And yet many of the replies to your posts are answering exactly what is so good about it. Apple are making their iPhone a desirable product that works well.

Mac Voyer gives an answer in post 171:
I had a PC back in the day as well as Hotsync. iTunes is far and away better than HS on its best day. iSync is better than HS on its best day. If iTunes was not the best of breed, Palm would not be staking everything on it. They are risking everything for iTunes, not HS, not Palm Desktop.

If you doubt how important iTunes sync is, just visit the Precentral.net site. Some openly admit they bought the Pre because it could sync using iTunes. This is a big deal and a big moment in tech history. Can't wait to see how it ends.

ANother answer is that it gives Palm and Pre owners a good chance to grow up and learn a life lesson: you don't get something for nothing; not every choice brings every reward: you have to make intelligent choices and live with them.

[dasanman69]

Sorry but using Internet explorer as an example is flawed every way you look at it. IE would disable other browsers that would be anti competition, since internet is not owned by MS. Apple own iTunes and Device ID, which Palm are using. Apple have every right to disable the Palm Pre, since it is using their device ID, which is no no by USB IF. Why don't Palm do what everyone esle does and develop a sync software. No its too easy to do it cheaply and then cry foul.

Sorry mate but Apple are not suing because it would raise awareness to Palm Pre, free publicity at Apple's expense. Noticed all the crying has come from Palm, wonder why.

Actually using IE as an example is perfect. MS fought hard to keep other browsers from being used on windows and not all websites were viewable on firefox at first. And if burgulars are gonna be shot then shoot steve jobs first. He created his whole empire by stealing from xerox. And hmmmm a device that constantly has to be updated to stop doing something apple doesn't like, sounds a lot like a jailbroken iphone to me since there are way more of them than there are palm pres. Do jailbreakers get tired of jailbreaking their iphones every time apple locks them out? The answer is no. Apple will not sue and I suspect palm continues doing what its doing as evidence against apple.

[piot]

Do jailbreakers get tired of jailbreaking their iphones every time apple locks them out? The answer is no.

Do jailbreakers amount to a significant part of the iPhone market... and does Apple care about them? The answer is no.

[xStatiCa]

This is a very good observation. I was one of the early to complain about Apple denying GV, but I've come around to the conclusion that Apple has somewhat of a point here.
Apple has no point here. There are quite a few apps that replace core dialling functionality so that argument is void. My favorite so far is Callway.

As is well known Google Voice is a non-VOIP app so that is ruled out as a reason.

I personally already have the Google Voice app. I downloaded it before it was pulled. I really don't like it that much because when you make an outgoing call through it, Google calls your phone to establish the call. That extra few seconds bugs me. I don't use all my minutes as it is anyway. I really don't see why it was pulled. It still uses your AT&T minutes. Now that VOIP will be approved it really doesn't make any sense to keep it from the appstore.