Quote:
Originally Posted by
teckstud 
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?
That is certainly a reason many likely choose to take the dive into Macs knowing they could be running Windows on it if they had to, but I feel that the internet has made proprietary software that works on only one OS less of an issue and that the Apple Stores dont get enough credit for helping people switch. Before the Apple Stores we only had crappy Mac kiosks wedged into corners of PC-dominated stores. They didnt have internet access and didnt have the appeal of the Apple Stores in bright, high-end areas.
MS wins in the short run if people are buying a full copy of Windows for their Mac, but they may lose in the long run if people stop using Windows altogether making that last retail copy of WIndows their last. Windows will not lose its dominance because of OS X, the numbers can never add up. If Apple was the largest worldwide PC vendor at 25% marketshare (what HP has) then theyd still only have 25% OS marketshare with Windows at nearly 75%.
PS: The only way I see for Windows to eventually fall is for open source, web-based OSes, like Googles ChromeOS, to actually work for selling/renting cheap PCs and PC-capable appliances to countries that are less industrialized and wealthy. These countries are itching for internet and I think ChromeOS is Googles clever plan to get advertising to the rest of the world by getting them online cheaply.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
anonymouse
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.
This seems to be one of those situations where Palm knows they are breaking the agreement but know there is nothing that can be done to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruel24
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?
I think that is how the iTunes Store started off, but I think that economy of scale has served Apple very well. Its not there largest grosser and it surely helps to sell other products but I think that do make a hefty profit at this time. I had a problem a few months ago trying to gift a TV Show episode. It didnt work and then after repeated tries it charged me 4 times for it, but I never got confirmation. After talking briefly with iTS support via chat I got all the purchases removed and 4 free purchases on top of that. While that could just be great customer service I think that Apple has plenty of leeway with their store profits at this point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
tt92618
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.
MS has already tried this by stating in the EULA that only certain versions of Windows Vista can be used in a VM. I think it was Basic that was not allowed, but I dont know if it was EULA only or if they had a way for the installer to verify. Regardless, it would be trivial to fool the Windows installer. The reason was to obviously sell the more expensive versions of Windows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
parky
They already provide a way for others to access the iTunes library, Palm were just to lazy to bother.
I wonder if it was just a cost saving method or a clever way to generate press. They say bad press is better than no press, and Apple is the giant here. Other vendors have apps that tie into the iTunes library quite nicely but most dont know they exist, but even my parents know about the Apple and Palm situation with iTunes. Or perhaps Im giving Palm too much credit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
phalanx
Microsoft should break iTunes with every version/patch they send out. iTunes would be nothing with out windows.
That would be anti-competitive, which is illegal. Both MS and Apple allow for anyone to write programs for their OSes. Apple has the iTunes Music folder and the iTunes Library XML file freely available and unencrypted for anyone to tie into with their apps for syncing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
charlituna
itunes is an application, not system software
I would have thought so, too, but this does read differently.
All system applications except DVD Player, Front Row, Grapher, and iTunes have been rewritten in 64-bit.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/
I suppose one can argue that since they come with the system they are system applications even though they arent specifically required for the system to run.
PS: Remember when iTunes was part of iLife? Remember when we could sync and charge via FireWire much faster?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
nikon133
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.
RiM has made there own app for Windows and OS X that will sync with the iTunes Library and grab the associated data files. You know, the ones in iTunes Music. it does not, in any way, connect to the iTunes app, pretend to be a USB device or any other shady method that Palm is using.
The link below has a demo you can watch.
http://na.blackberry.com/eng/service...b_requirements
* Note that the requirements have a certain version of iTunes listed. This does not mean that it runs iTunes, but that the iTunes Library XML file has to be of a certain version or later for the RiM app to correctly read the XML file as Apple tweaks it from time to time
PS: If they wanted to kill Palm there are other more effective ways they could have done it. As I mentioned earlier this method really is a good way for Palm to get free advertising as the David to Apples Goliath. How many here even knew RiM has an app for syncing to BBs. I know longtime BB users that didnt know until I told them.
\
