or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › iTunes sync spat between Palm, Apple continues
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iTunes sync spat between Palm, Apple continues - Page 3

post #81 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by LE Studios View Post

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.

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.
post #82 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homie View Post

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.
Apple has no competition. Every commercial product which competes directly with an Apple product gives the distinct impression that, Where it is original, it is not good, and where it is good, it...
Reply
Apple has no competition. Every commercial product which competes directly with an Apple product gives the distinct impression that, Where it is original, it is not good, and where it is good, it...
Reply
post #83 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero View Post

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'.

Save your friends from Skynet - whoops, Google.  Recommend they use StartPage for search..

...and no, I am not paid to say this..

Reply

Save your friends from Skynet - whoops, Google.  Recommend they use StartPage for search..

...and no, I am not paid to say this..

Reply
post #84 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hattig View Post

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?
Apple has no competition. Every commercial product which competes directly with an Apple product gives the distinct impression that, Where it is original, it is not good, and where it is good, it...
Reply
Apple has no competition. Every commercial product which competes directly with an Apple product gives the distinct impression that, Where it is original, it is not good, and where it is good, it...
Reply
post #85 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero View Post

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?
post #86 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabbelen View Post

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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by krabbelen View Post

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...

Quote:
Originally Posted by krabbelen View Post

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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by krabbelen View Post

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
post #87 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac Voyer View Post

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.
post #88 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hattig View Post

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.
Apple has no competition. Every commercial product which competes directly with an Apple product gives the distinct impression that, Where it is original, it is not good, and where it is good, it...
Reply
Apple has no competition. Every commercial product which competes directly with an Apple product gives the distinct impression that, Where it is original, it is not good, and where it is good, it...
Reply
post #89 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubert View Post

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.
post #90 of 182
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.
post #91 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

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?
post #92 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostkiwi View Post

@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!
post #93 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

according this article at precentral.net

http://www.precentral.net/how-palm-r...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.
post #94 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homie View Post

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


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

Apparently not.
post #95 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by CurtisEMayle View Post

No ... Republican.

I had been wondering, so they are not the same thing after all!
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #96 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

How do you like your Intel based G4?

Oh cruel
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #97 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

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

Apparently not.

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

- Foghorn Leghorn
post #98 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero View Post

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!
post #99 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homie View Post

Illegal? [...] that does not mean Palm is doing something "illegal."

Quite right! If anything, Palm is merely in breach of contract.

Quote:
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.
post #100 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabbelen View Post

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?
post #101 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac Voyer View Post

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.
post #102 of 182
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...

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #103 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by freddyok View Post

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.
Quote:
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.
post #104 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

according this article at precentral.net

http://www.precentral.net/how-palm-r...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!
post #105 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero View Post

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.
post #106 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero View Post

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...-alternatives/
I looked at them and chose to use iTunes to manage my iPod as I felt it was best.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero View Post

* 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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero View Post

* 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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero View Post

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.

Save your friends from Skynet - whoops, Google.  Recommend they use StartPage for search..

...and no, I am not paid to say this..

Reply

Save your friends from Skynet - whoops, Google.  Recommend they use StartPage for search..

...and no, I am not paid to say this..

Reply
post #107 of 182
[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)
post #108 of 182
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?
post #109 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by blur35mm View Post


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

I rest my case, your Honor.
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
post #110 of 182
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
post #111 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homie View Post

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.
post #112 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ Web View Post

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

You praising them?
post #113 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

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.
post #114 of 182
Double
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #115 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul View Post

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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul View Post

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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul View Post

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.
post #116 of 182
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.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #117 of 182
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...
post #118 of 182
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.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero View Post

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

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero View Post

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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero View Post

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.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #119 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homie View Post

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?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Homie View Post

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.
post #120 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkral View Post

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.
Marquiz d' Gabber von Gabberaarde

... and Windows Vista...
... fails on the Moon...
... 6x slower!
Reply
Marquiz d' Gabber von Gabberaarde

... and Windows Vista...
... fails on the Moon...
... 6x slower!
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › iTunes sync spat between Palm, Apple continues