or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › With iTunes 9, Apple again disables Palm Pre sync
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

With iTunes 9, Apple again disables Palm Pre sync - Page 2

post #41 of 95
Apple breaks iTunes syncing with Pre.

So? Who really gives a sweet f about any third party wanting to use iTunes? They can either license rights from Apple, create their own iTunes knockoff, or just shut up.

I don't understand how someone can get upset over this. I for one don't care if Pre users are locked out, nor will I care if Palm and all of its products go up in smoke tomorrow.

Apple locking out the Pre has absolutely no impact on the iTunes user base.
post #42 of 95
Ultimately there is no way Apple can permanently block Palm, unless Apple is willing to break compatibility with old iPods and implement more sophisticated authentication of new ones. All Apple can do is repeatedly change how iTunes queries the iPod and all Palm has to do is find out what is the right response now. It's just an annoyance to Palm and Palm users. "Join Club Apple and Apple's bouncer will stop throwing you out of the club" isn't the greatest sales pitch ever.

Remember iTunes was introduced some time before the iPod and was initially designed to support third-party devices. The change since then is similar to if a future version of iPhoto worked only with Apple cameras. When Apple sold printers they did not prevent the Mac from working with third-party printers. Too many Apple fans seem willing to embrace the idea that users are cast members in Apple's play. Apple is the user's hired help and the products are purchased by users to serve the user's interests.

Apple could make money by selling third-party support plugins.
post #43 of 95
Unusual amount of the resident legal and business "experts" cropping up in this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Or Miscrosoft could have killed off Macs running Windows by disabling Boot Camp or Paralells. Don't be surprised if it happens. Then will see who cries foul. MS could simply enable this as part of their users contract on Windows 7.

Is there any good reason why Microsoft would actually do that?

They would (if legally installed) be making more money from every Boot Camp Windows user then an OEM licence.
post #44 of 95
It's behaviour just like this that ensures I will never buy an iPhone again.
I thought Microsoft was bad...
post #45 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic_Al View Post

Ultimately there is no way Apple can permanently block Palm, unless Apple is willing to break compatibility with old iPods and implement more sophisticated authentication of new ones.

Not necessarily. Supposing that each iPod/iPhone has a serial number and/or other unique ID and/or characteristic that can be queried (and the iPhones, and I believe at least newer, if not all, iPods, do) they could require that the iPod/iPhone be validated through the iTunes store (like iPhone activation) before it will sync, at least the first time. This would require Palm to copy specific information from Apple manufactured devices and essentially forge them on their devices. If the device has to be registered to sync (e.g., associated with an Apple ID) forging them would be almost impossible to do reliably, and would run into all sorts of legal issues.

That's just one possibility. There are probably a number of ways Apple could permanently stop Palm devices from syncing via the iTunes Application.


As for comparisons to Microsoft and it's actions with IE vs. Netscape, the comparison is wholly invalid.

First of all, Microsoft was (is) a monopolist using its monopoly power in one market (operating systems) to take over another market (web browsers, and, arguably, the Internet); Apple holds no such monopoly position in any market.

Secondly, Windows is an operating system, which, by definition, is supposed to run applications. Subverting that basic purpose to control the Windows' application market -- i.e., undermining the ability of non-Microsoft apps to run -- is an abuse of monopoly power. The iTunes application is not an operating system. Its essentially an iPod/iPhone accessory/tool, that also provides the user with "media center" functions; but its primary purpose, and the reason Apple updates and enhances it, is to sell iPods and iPhones.


Palm has many possible options to provide users with sync capability with their media collections and iTunes libraries that don't involve unsupported hacks to utilize the iTunes application. Apple has no legal, or even ethical, obligation to support or even tolerate these, especially since they undermine iTunes purpose, which is to sell hardware. (This situation is in some ways analogous to the Psystar case.)

If you want to use the iTunes application to sync with your phone or media player, then buy an iPhone or iPod. If you don't want to buy one of those, then don't complain to Apple when you can't sync your media to it using their iTunes application, complain to your hardware vendor, in this case Palm, and tell them to create a solution for you instead of playing games that hurt their users.
post #46 of 95
Apple doesn't ned to block Palm permanently. Just keep breaking iTunes syncing with every update.

Would frustrate the hell out of Palm users, and raise questions/complaints about Palm's on-again, off-again iTunes sync "feature." Imagine Palm advertising a "feature" that is not only not really theirs, but works only some of the time.

Then again, I believe palm already filed a complaint against Apple, which might just be the beginning of the end of this "feature."
post #47 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot View Post

Is there any good reason why Microsoft would actually do that?

Part of the appeal of "switching" is the ability to run both OS's. If you can't run Windoze and all your software that goes with it then why would you switch?
post #48 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Then again, I believe palm already filed a complaint against Apple, which might just be the beginning of the end of this "feature."

Based on my understanding of Palm's complaint, I don't think that's going anywhere. Apple isn't blocking their devices from being recognized as USB devices (as far as I know) on any system; they are only stopping their specific application software from interacting with them. On the other hand, Palm is misidentifying their devices as another manufacturer's, which is a violation of USB standards. (And possibly a violation of trademark law, as well.)

Not to mention the fact that the standards body doesn't really have any enforcement powers that can be applied to either company.
post #49 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Part of the appeal of "switching" is the ability to run both OS's. If you can't run Windoze and all your software that goes with it then why would you switch?

To get away from Windows entirely. Which is why a lot of people switch.
post #50 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post

It's called the free-rider problem and if you believe in the free enterprise system then you should recognize the free-rider problem as a problem. Or shall we now force Ford to compel their dealers to accept GM cars for servicing even if Ford doesn't want to? Or shall we force the ground crew of American Airlines to assist United Airlines passengers even though American Airlines doesn't want to? Or shall I now be allowed to buy a meal at McDonalds and then get a table at Le Cirq and eat my happy meal there without ordering anything from Le Cirq?

You forget you can also take your Ford to any garage and have it fixed... Or you can flip the problem around - what if Ford forced you to buy Exxon gas and firestone tires... (with RFID they could technically do this, which is scary).

Or look at iTunes as the "gas station". It fills up whoever it wants to. Which begs the question, is itunes a 'gas station', or is it just a marketing tool to sell ipods?
post #51 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruel24 View Post

Yes, open standards are good. The problem is that, as stated many times by Apple, and proven by the relatively small profit they make from it, iTunes is not designed as a profit area. Instead, it's designed to sell iPods. Now, with that in mind, why would they, then, open the iTunes store to anyone?

Hasn't that shipped sailed and Apple now makes a tun on money off iTunes? It was only last year they were threatening to stop selling songs if they couldn't make money from it.

I think this is another low for Apple. For all the arguments about Apple spending money to support other peoples devices, would it really cost them anything? After all there's boot camp to run windows but they don't offer any support with it. They could make an API to allow others to connect but only allow basic functions. Although if they did it could be argued then that there giving themselves an advantage in Phones and MP3 players with iTunes. At what point does iTunes stop being an App and start becomes the part of the OS for devices? After all as far as I remember iPhones and iPOD's don't show up in the OS as connected hardware by default.
post #52 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

Very poor Apple. Would it really dent your ego so much to open iTunes up to any device through an API? You're behaving like Mircosoft from the bad old days, and that's just not cool.

Open standards = good.

Remember that Free Software does not mean no cost. Free can mean both open and free of charge. In this sense, I agree that iTunes store should be Freely accessible. Since Apple operates the iTunes store such that it makes little off it (it is a feature for its own products), then any company interfacing it should have free access but only if they pay for it. Then the store would be Free (Access) but not Free (in cost). Apple built it, gambled on it and spent its time making the business deals for it to work so they should receive that benefit.

I'm interested in the legal ramifications of a device claiming to be something else though. I'd imagine this would be a major legal issue and assume Apple is goading Palm into a legal trap... i.e. I dare you to claim X as you are going to get sued for lost revenue and market share (yup, Apple to Palm marketshare)... Good-bye Palm OS by way of the courts. I'd think the court would have to rule that way.
post #53 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Part of the appeal of "switching" is the ability to run both OS's. If you can't run Windoze and all your software that goes with it then why would you switch?

I consider it highly unlikely that MS would do this. First of all, doing so would require that MS be able to tell that they are running inside a VM, and they cannot easily do so; the entire point of virtual machines is that they appear to the hosted OS exactly like real hardware, so the best they could do is detect the particular configuration that the VM's use, which would have the additional effect of blocking real hardware too. Moreover, even if they could reliably detect that they are running in a VM, they would have a hard time detecting that this VM was running on a Mac without cooperation from the VM vendors (which they are not going to get), so they would need to alter their OS so significantly that it wouldn't run on any virtual machine, and that would upset so many people that I think it unlikely that MS would ever do it.

To make such restrictions work would likely involve the use of hardware embedded authentication, and good luck getting manufacturers to go along with that. It is the very same reason it is possible to hack Mac OS to run on non-Apple hardware.
post #54 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

Did you miss the point about "standard interface" in the original poster's message? Apple wouldn't have to support hundreds of devices. They just give a protocol that device manufacturers can use and move on with their lives. It's clearly not that hard to tie into Apple's existing iPod sync protocol except for the fact that Apple has locked the gates to any hardware but their own.

I for one would appreciate Apple and it would make me more likely to stay with a Mac when I go to purchase my next computer. At least on a Mac, iTunes is a pretty integral part of the user experience and I'm not happy with how Apple has tied it to their own hardware. I want to be able to do what I want with my computer. Apple is free to lock down their peripheral hardware (like iPhones and iPods) all they want but I want my computer to do what I want it to do, not what Apple decides it should do.

They already provide a way for others to access the iTunes library, Palm were just to lazy to bother.
post #55 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

For all the arguments about Apple spending money to support other peoples devices, would it really cost them anything?

Yes, it would cost them iPod and iPhone sales.

Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

They could make an API to allow others to connect but only allow basic functions.

As has been pointed out ad infinitum there is nothing stopping Palm from writing their own application that syncs an iTunes library with their devices. They are just trying to avoid investing their own resources in supporting their users, which is why they don't produce any desktop sync software or capability of any kind, but, for example, force you to hand over your personal information to Google if you want to sync it somewhere.

The iTunes library and the iTunes application are two separate things, like MS Word documents and the MS Word application, or PDF documents and Acrobat.
post #56 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

Hasn't that shipped sailed and Apple now makes a tun on money off iTunes? It was only last year they were threatening to stop selling songs if they couldn't make money from it.

I think this is another low for Apple. For all the arguments about Apple spending money to support other peoples devices, would it really cost them anything? After all there's boot camp to run windows but they don't offer any support with it. They could make an API to allow others to connect but only allow basic functions. Although if they did it could be argued then that there giving themselves an advantage in Phones and MP3 players with iTunes. At what point does iTunes stop being an App and start becomes the part of the OS for devices? After all as far as I remember iPhones and iPOD's don't show up in the OS as connected hardware by default.

Yes, the store costs money to maintain.
Yes, support for hardware and software costs real money.
Yes, boot camp costs money to maintain, i.e. upgrading it to Snow Leopard for one.
Yes, creating an API and maintaining it would cost money. And to do it for the competition...
Yes, OS X can be used without iTunes so it is still just an App.

Wow, were these real questions? No hostility is meant by this post, though it comes across that way.
post #57 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Switch23 View Post

I must've missed that chapter of the iPod's history where Apple head-faked Windows Media Player so that the iPod could dominate the .mp3 player market.

Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
post #58 of 95
Personally I'm just happy that the Pre got stuffed.
Serves them right for advertising iTunes as a feature.
No sympathy for them at all.
post #59 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adlerson View Post

It's behaviour just like this that ensures I will never buy an iPhone again.
I thought Microsoft was bad...

Don't let the door hit you in the arse on the way out.
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
post #60 of 95
It looks like Apple is just itching for a fight, which is stupid, since they are clearly on the wrong side of the law. That aside, they should consider the practical public relations issue of a youthful vibrant Obama Justice Department out to save the world from the raging corporate monopolies that have brought our economy to the brink of disaster being pitted in the press against a frail old billionaire who just stole a liver from some poor Tennessee kid so he could move back to California to squeeze a few more pennies out of fanatical Apple fans who naively still think he's the brilliant young idealist who set out to change the world four decades ago. What a difference a few decades and billion dollars makes in a man's principles. People are starting to notice.
post #61 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLL View Post

Apple allows other apps to look in the iTunes data (and iPhoto, Address Book, iCal, Mail).

Palm could make their own syncing app if they want to - RIM did it.

and that is why RIM is where they are and Palm is not

Hopefully Palm is spending this time playing retard by creating their own syncing app.
post #62 of 95
http://www.doubletwist.com/

Are there any Palm Pre owners among the Appleinsider members? I would be curious to know how well this software works.
post #63 of 95
Microsoft should break iTunes with every version/patch they send out. iTunes would be nothing with out windows.
post #64 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSnarkmeister View Post

It looks like Apple is just itching for a fight, which is stupid, since they are clearly on the wrong side of the law.


Oh really? Palm is the one itching for a fight because it gives the Pre more press coverage. I would say the most blatant wrong being committed here is the Pre claiming to be an iPod.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #65 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by phalanx View Post

Microsoft should break iTunes with every version/patch they send out. iTunes would be nothing with out windows.

The two concepts aren't the same in the least.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #66 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

My point is really this: By allowing iTunes to be opened to Palm/RIM/MS/etc... means that people with these devices could BUY from the iTunes store (which is the main reason the software is free in the first place). They may not be Apple products, but Apple would be getting revenue, even taking it away from Rhapsody (ugh how I loathe them). On top of that, they would draw in customers to their eco-chain instead of pushing them away like they are now.

That's where you're wrong... Apple is not worried about making money from iTunes. In the past it's been more of a break even business for them. Now it's a bigger business, but that's due mostly to the tie in with their hardware. Sure it's nice when they do make money, but the main reason behind it is to sell hardware that works with it. ie Macs, iPods and iPhones. Just look at the App Store. It's been a huge success and money maker for them, but it only works if you have an iPod or iPhone.

Although the idea of opening iTunes up to all 3rd parties sounds great, it's a bad idea business wise and won't happen. What Palm is doing is pathetic in my eyes. They're relying on their main competitor to offer a service they're too lazy to do themselves. Develop your own software like RIM did to work with iTunes or make a competing service. The open API argument doesn't fly here cause Apple isn't like Facebook or Twitter... they're a hardware company, selling hardware at a premium price because of the simple integration between the hardware and software. Opening iTunes up would just become a huge headache and tarnish the user experience.
post #67 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by appleinsider View Post

the tug of war between apple and palm continues, as the latest update to itunes has once again blocked the palm pre from syncing with a users' itunes library.

When the palm pre was first released, it, by default, would transfer media from itunes by incorrectly identifying itself as an ipod. Apple struck back in july with itunes 8.2.1, which broke sync capabilities, but only temporarily.

A week later, palm fired back with webos 1.1, a software update that again enabled the pre to access media from itunes. In a jab at apple, palm announced the fix at the end of a blog post by stating "oh, and one more thing," just as the ipod maker often does when it introduces new products at a keynote.

According to precentral.net, when sync initially worked, the pre identified itself as a "mass storage device" called an ipod. Then, to get it working the second time, palm had the device identify itself as a "mass storage device manufactured by apple" called an ipod.

Given the back-and-forth nature of the ongoing dispute, it's likely safe to assume that palm will once again issue a webos update and circumvent apple's latest blocking method. The latest update, webos 1.2, was expected to be released this week, but has been quietly delayed.

In other palm news, the handset maker this week unveiled the pixi, the second smartphone built on the webos platform. It is coming to sprint later this year.

The timing of palm's announcement has once again seen the company overshadowed by apple, with the ipod maker announced new media players this week. Earlier this summer, the pre launched just as apple announced the iphone 3gs.

what proof can a i offer to back these claims that apple block the pre ??
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #68 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSnarkmeister View Post

It looks like Apple is just itching for a fight, which is stupid, since they are clearly on the wrong side of the law.

Just to clarify, are you a lawyer? Specifically, are you an anti-trust or intellectual property attorney? I'm just curious what information you are drawing upon to so confidently assert that Apple is on the wrong side of the law. While you are at it, can you comment on Palm's identification of their device as A) manufactured by Apple, and B) being an iPod. Last time I checked, those are both trademarked names that can't be used without permission. Perhaps I am just in the dark, here.

Quote:
against a frail old billionaire who just stole a liver from some poor Tennessee kid so he could move back to California to squeeze a few more pennies out of fanatical Apple fans who naively still think he's the brilliant young idealist who set out to change the world four decades ago.

That's just cold and nasty. First, characterizing SJ's liver transplant as 'theft' is just bonkers crazy. You act like he rear ended the guy on the highway himself, so he could quick grab that liver. Is that the sort of trash you are arguing, or were you just trying to show the rest of us how ignorant you are of how the transplant process works?

Quote:
What a difference a few decades and billion dollars makes in a man's principles. People are starting to notice.

Do you happen to know the man, or are you once again speaking out of your rear end? Unless you personally know SJ, then we'll have to classify your rant as mean spirited trolling.
post #69 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

what proof can a i offer to back these claims that apple block the pre ??

Phil S. stated this publicly at a White House press conference yesterday. Did you not catch this??
Hard-Core.
Reply
Hard-Core.
Reply
post #70 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hattig View Post

System software like iTunes which is used for mobile device sync should work with any third party hardware. Otherwise it's enforcing product tie-in, and is a horribly Microsoftian type tactic.

I'm not saying that Apple's own products can't have more advanced features (e.g., apps from the app store), but that there should be a bare minimum support for media and PIM sync via a standard protocol that third party device could implement.

Itunes is not a software program it is the largest music/podcast/movie /app etc etc store in the world .with hundreds upon hundreds of written agreements with third and fourth and fifth parties in over 65 languages . these thousand of small companies have followed all the apple rules as apple follows there rules >>in some cases apple took yrs to enter a market . Why or should palm cut the line and walk in ?? For free?? even the commies forced apple to sign agreements
Why is apple held accountable to palm ?? This is a common situation and most times parties sit down and work it out
its called business
Like intel ands nvida chip makers who compete yet have agreements on three or four chip designs .

Really dude what does apple owe palm ??
Why should apple hurt its shareholders by giving away its buisness rights . Apple will soon have invested hundreds of millions to over a billion $USA dollars in the whole itunes empire , PALM HAS invested zero dollars ina music store.
ALSO palm has gone out of its way to block apple anything in the past .
really dude you have a warped idea of how thing;s work themselve's out in this world
really dude
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #71 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by aplnub View Post

Phil S. stated this publicly at a White House press conference yesterday. Did you not catch this??

OH BOY http://www.comicbookbin.com/comicsnews101.html

THE COMIC BOOK SITE SAYS SO
and that is real proof that apple updates its itunes and somehow palm pre gets blocked
well i will say to all those bloggers across the whole net and including the idiots here that APPLE updates all its SW ALL THE TIME . What should apple do ??

And if you sell a quarter million smartphones with 2 yr deals and link it to a place that does not accept you or even care if you die in a horrible train wreck you should expect to lose the LINK every time the owner of the music store updates .
and if this same company invented smartphones way back when and has sold tens of millions of phones you think it would not risk its clients ire over a real stupid move like linking to a closed system without calling apple to iron things out .

so we have apple and its a great company
and we have palm also good but did a stupid move
and we have all the idiots backing the palm
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #72 of 95
BS. iTunes is NOT system software. It is an application that Apple gives away free to create value for the hardware that it sells. It is what in part makes the iPods, iPhones, and Macs Apple products. Apple gives away it's developer tools for free, and in no way is preventing Palm from developing an application to sync music on the Mac.

However, not only does Palm want to take hardware sales from Apple, but it also wants to use Apple's product to do so. Apple shouldn't be required to allow Palm to do so. iTunes is attractive to Palm because it works on both Macs and Windows. Besides interfering with Apple's chosen business model, Palm using iTunes has another problem.

Palm users on Windows are unlikely to be compensating Apple in any way for the use of iTunes. They aren't using a Mac, and they probably are using the Palm device to replace an iPod or iPhone.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Hattig View Post

System software like iTunes which is used for mobile device sync should work with any third party hardware. Otherwise it's enforcing product tie-in, and is a horribly Microsoftian type tactic.

I'm not saying that Apple's own products can't have more advanced features (e.g., apps from the app store), but that there should be a bare minimum support for media and PIM sync via a standard protocol that third party device could implement.
post #73 of 95
LOL. Except for the fact that Al Gore sits on Apple's Board, and Clintons have stayed at Jobs house when their daughter was going to college in California. I doubt Obama will spend a lot of time looking at Apple.

As for the stealing the liver part, you should be careful. That is called libel. It is a tort, and Jobs could sue you. Yes, I am a lawyer. The Tennessee hospital in question has publicly stated he legitimately was the next person in line because Tennessee has a low waiting list.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSnarkmeister View Post

It looks like Apple is just itching for a fight, which is stupid, since they are clearly on the wrong side of the law. That aside, they should consider the practical public relations issue of a youthful vibrant Obama Justice Department out to save the world from the raging corporate monopolies that have brought our economy to the brink of disaster being pitted in the press against a frail old billionaire who just stole a liver from some poor Tennessee kid so he could move back to California to squeeze a few more pennies out of fanatical Apple fans who naively still think he's the brilliant young idealist who set out to change the world four decades ago. What a difference a few decades and billion dollars makes in a man's principles. People are starting to notice.
post #74 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

BS. iTunes is NOT system software. It is an application that Apple gives away free to create value for the hardware that it sells. It is what in part makes the iPods, iPhones, and Macs Apple products. Apple gives away it's developer tools for free, and in no way is preventing Palm from developing an application to sync music on the Mac.

However, not only does Palm want to take hardware sales from Apple, but it also wants to use Apple's product to do so. Apple shouldn't be required to allow Palm to do so. iTunes is attractive to Palm because it works on both Macs and Windows. Besides interfering with Apple's chosen business model, Palm using iTunes has another problem.

Palm users on Windows are unlikely to be compensating Apple in any way for the use of iTunes. They aren't using a Mac, and they probably are using the Palm device to replace an iPod or iPhone.

+1
agreed
i wish i said as well as you have
9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #75 of 95
It is sad to read the posts from all these pre-sentimentalists. It's got nothing to do with restaurants, cars or windows for that matter.

What Palm is doing is exactly the same as... What's the companies name again? Oh yeah, Phystar. ...is doing. Pretending to be a particular hardware in order to use all the development efforts done by Apple. Apple even provides tools to third-party folks to create their own software. Yet Palm refuses to do so and puts itself in the mercy of their competitors.

As a customer of Palm, having bought the pre, I would be upset that they didn't take the time to create their own application and that they are putting their customers in such a position. I wouldn't even buy hardware from a company that puts itself at the mercy of one of their competitors. If that's how they do business they might do the same to you. Think about it.
Posted by the door post at the post office the post man posted his last post-millennial post card with a Penny Black postage stamp via the Royal Post.
Reply
Posted by the door post at the post office the post man posted his last post-millennial post card with a Penny Black postage stamp via the Royal Post.
Reply
post #76 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hattig View Post

System software like iTunes

itunes is an application, not system software

Quote:
which is used for mobile device sync should work with any third party hardware. Otherwise it's enforcing product tie-in, and is a horribly Microsoftian type tactic.

I'm not saying that Apple's own products can't have more advanced features (e.g., apps from the app store), but that there should be a bare minimum support for media and PIM sync via a standard protocol that third party device could implement.

Itunes uses XML to hold the library info, making it very easy for anyone to write an interface for their devices automatically recognizes what music you have and where on your drive it is located.

certainly not a totally closed system is it. compared to say iweb or iphoto


Quote:
Originally Posted by johnmcboston View Post

Is it leeching, or just using what just popular?

it is leeching when you either don't ask for permission or having been told no you do it anyway. and continue to do it when you are told no via someone blocking you from continuing


Quote:
Originally Posted by SGSStateStudent View Post

I don't understand why Apple dosen't sue them for that. It's blatantly going against rights!

because it is not illegal. it's more a case of being rude.

there is a USB forum that dishes out the id codes but they have no weight of law. the best they can do is to refuse to give someone device codes or a vendor code. but that's it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hattig View Post

Oh right, so it wasn't shipped with Snow Leopard then?

yeah well they also included Flash which is from Adobe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

if microsoft would have killed itunes from the get go with this tactic that apple is using on palm (why should apple get a free ride on MS marketshare?) then you would see a lot more zunes in use.

funny you mention Microsoft and Zune. cause you know they refuse to create a Mac version of that software and you can't sync an ipod with the Zune software.

Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

I've brought a Ford into a Toyota shop before, and they fixed up my fiance's car without any issue or complaints.

because they wanted to. if they had said no there is nothing to force them

Quote:
On a flight that was cancelled back when TWA was around, I had to fly on United who were nice enough to all those TWA people (yes, on TWA's dollar I believe).

you have no idea what kind of handshake deals they might have going to help each other out in an emergency

Quote:
I've seen folks bring in McDonalds into other restaurants (mainly for their children) and usually the restaurant was fine with it as long as they bought stuff there.

the key being that something was bought from the other restaurant. if you just walked in with your McDs and sat down without ordering something from them you wouldn't be so welcome.

Quote:
My point is really this: By allowing iTunes to be opened to Palm/RIM/MS/etc... means that people with these devices could BUY from the iTunes store

uh, they can buy now. nothing is stopping anyone from buying from the itunes store so long as you have an internet connected computer and the money. you don't need an ipod or anything else.


Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Not necessarily. Supposing that each iPod/iPhone has a serial number and/or other unique ID and/or characteristic that can be queried (and the iPhones, and I believe at least newer, if not all, iPods, do) they could require that the iPod/iPhone be validated through the iTunes store (like iPhone activation) before it will sync, at least the first time. This would require Palm to copy specific information from Apple manufactured devices and essentially forge them on their devices.

which is what they did, using the vendor code. now they will have to probably go in and pick a device code as well. which just makes them even more guilty of being douches.


Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

what proof can a i offer to back these claims that apple block the pre ??

find the exact code that analyzes the device, identifies if as coming from Palm and tells itunes to ignore the device.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #77 of 95
iTunes is Apple's software, meant to work with Apple's devices or possibly those and only those approved by Apple. Apple makes no bones about this. It's pretty clear and is perfectly legal. Even by the EU's standards.

You know for how long this has been a problem? Since never.

It's an artificial issue that seems to exist only on tech fansites on the ass-end of the net, perpetuated by people who want to have whatever they want, when they want it, and are prepared to justify it with ridiculous arguments.

The whole Pre-not-syncing-with-iTunes situation is a non-issue. It doesn't matter. Direct all bellyaching toward Palm and the rest of the industry for not being able to offer any better alternatives if the issue really does mean that much to you.
post #78 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hattig View Post

System software like iTunes which is used for mobile device sync should work with any third party hardware. Otherwise it's enforcing product tie-in, and is a horribly Microsoftian type tactic.

I'm not saying that Apple's own products can't have more advanced features (e.g., apps from the app store), but that there should be a bare minimum support for media and PIM sync via a standard protocol that third party device could implement.

Unfortunately Apple is more Microsoftian nowadays than Microsoft is.

You can put MS Windows on any brand PC. You can't put OSX on anything but Apple.

There is MS Office for OSX. There is no iWork for Windows.

Windows Media Player, I believe, is also opened to any media player willing to follow specs. iTunes is trying to prevent player that actually follows its specs.
post #79 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by parky View Post

And who exactly pays Apple for the work to design, build and test that iTunes works with the hundreds of devices that exist? How quick would complain when iTunes got bigger and bigger and more bloated due the support required for non Apple devices.

Beside Apple players, I believe most others are standardised and will act like mass storage device or something... so supporting all of them with a single module should not be a problem.

But Apple does not want us to use their hardware without their software, and doesn't want other hardware to use their software, unless they see big money in there. I was told Blackberries will sync with iTunes - if that is true, then it is obvious Apple wants money from numerous BB users, but at the same time as they know number of Pre users is still limited and would not generate significant income, they are trying to assassinate Palm Pre platform while still in its infancy in every possible way.

A bit of nasty, a bit of greedy, and all together ugly.
post #80 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

To get away from Windows entirely. Which is why a lot of people switch.

But a lot of people can't afford to get away from Windows for various reasons, and in not being able to run Windows on Mac they would be forced to stay with Windows, or have separate Mac and Windows computers.

I believe that would reduce current number of Mac users... \
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › With iTunes 9, Apple again disables Palm Pre sync