Palm fires back at Apple, fixes Pre sync with iTunes

1234579

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 166
    djrumpydjrumpy Posts: 1,116member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mavi View Post


    Trademark law doesn't have anything to do with iTunes code. Trademark law applies when companies do something that make consumers likely to confuse their product with another. Thus, tricking computers is not trademark violation, tricking people is. Telling people your product can sync with iTunes does not make a reasonable consumer think its an Apple product.



    If having the Pre communicate with iTunes as if it was an iPod were illegal, many things, such as proxies, would also be illegal.



    The Pre presents itself in iTunes as an iPod, which is where I think they were going with that.
  • Reply 122 of 166
    hezekiahbhezekiahb Posts: 448member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lisamacnewton View Post


    Too all Pre users.....



    You want to use Apple products? BUY AN iPHONE/iPod.



    Otherwise stop whining......







    I'm tired of people who whine "it's not fair we can't do this" attitude and then hack in. If you pay the premium, you GET THE PREMIUM. Simple as that. Stop being juvenile, Palm. I trashed my Treo years ago because it didn't keep up with the times (mostly software).



    Agreed, if Palm wanted to achieve syncing with iTunes music & video they should have written their own app that reads the iTunes XML info & then lists up it's own version of your library to sync.



    Palm is crazy to think they can fight a legal battle in their current weakened state. Only reason Apple hasn't nailed them to the wall yet is probably because it would make for bad PR.
  • Reply 123 of 166
    ireality85ireality85 Posts: 316member
    I see no reason why Apple shouldn't allow Palm Pre owners to sync with iTunes. After all, anyone who is well versed in strategic decision making knows that while it is good to keep your friends close (in this case, Apple's own users), it is even better to keep your enemies closer (users of products made by Apple's rivals). In other words, it behooves Apple to allow users of rivals' products (e.g. Palm Pre owners) access to iTunes. By locking those users out, Apple may inadvertently force them to look elsewhere for their media library solutions; Apple may also force the competition (Palm) to look to Microsoft (etc) for syncing solutions, or Palm may choose to innovate and compete directly with iTunes itself, which may or may not be in Apple's best interest. To automatically assert that Apple should shut its rivals out of iTunes because it is Apple's software shows a lack of strategic foresight from Apple's perspective.
  • Reply 124 of 166
    mavimavi Posts: 9member
    Except that iPods, not iTunes are what is more valuable to Apple. Keeping the system locked may threaten iTunes, but unlocking it would threaten iPods.
  • Reply 125 of 166
    chronsterchronster Posts: 1,894member
    This is all getting silly and making both companies look bad. Palm looks bad for their devious ways to get itunes to sync, and apple looks bad by going out of their way to block it showing that they give a damn.



    Apple should take the high road and say fuck it.
  • Reply 126 of 166
    mavimavi Posts: 9member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post


    The Pre presents itself in iTunes as an iPod, which is where I think they were going with that.



    And whatever my electronics tell each other has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not trademark law is violated. Its only if I reasonably might think they are something there not, such as if Palm marketed the Pre as the Apple Pre, that trademark law is implicated.
  • Reply 127 of 166
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,860member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mesomorphicman View Post


    If I was a Pre owner, I'd be disgruntled with Palm, thankfully I am a 3GS owner. Shouldn't Pre owners feel like they are getting substandard service and attention. Palm keeps marketing their "great" WebOS and how revolutionary it is and how it allows you to do soo many things, yet they tell users to piggyback on someone else's software and ingenuity to sync.



    Well, if you're a Mac owner, you got used to substandard service and attention from Palm a long time ago, so if you're a Mac owner and a Pre owner, you probably don't really expect much in the way of support anyway. If you're a Wintel owner, you'll be used to it soon.



    The whole Pre concept is based on Palm not investing any resources to support the device. Not only have they not created their own music sync solution, they haven't really created a sync solution for anything on the device: everything piggybacks on something else. Of course, they market this as "connecting you to the cloud," but the reality is that the whole device and how it works is a giant hack.



    If it weren't for Palm's history of neglecting users, I'd just put this down to the fact that they are so cash-strapped they can barely get a new device out the door, but it may go deeper than that. Palm is not a company that anyone should ever depend on for anything that matters.
  • Reply 128 of 166
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,808member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mavi View Post


    No, the issue at the time was that it came with the computer and that the computers couldn't be sold with Netscape on it. The uninstallability of it was never an issue.



    Better think again....
  • Reply 129 of 166
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,742member
    What Palm has done is ensure every future iPod will have to authenticate to iTunes. For everyone who wondered WTF when they found out the new earbuds with volume/pause/skip controls have some sort of authentication chip, this is why.
  • Reply 130 of 166
    It would be a different situation if iTunes were meant to strictly support iPods and iPhones AND there were no iTunes music store OR if music purchased from the iTunes store was meant to be played only on iPods / iPhones.



    Apple doesn't necessarily have the responsibility to fully support non-Apple devices but it shouldn't prevent syncing either.
  • Reply 131 of 166
    mavimavi Posts: 9member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macxpress View Post


    Better think again....



    Microsoft formed restrictive licensing agreements with computer manufactuers to ensure that IE was the only browser featured.
  • Reply 132 of 166
    djrumpydjrumpy Posts: 1,116member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by John.B View Post


    What Palm has done is ensure every future iPod will have to authenticate to iTunes. For everyone who wondered WTF when they found out the new earbuds with volume/pause/skip controls have some sort of authentication chip, this is why.



    Last time I checked, you don't sync your iPod via the audio jack. Stop making silly claims. I agree the path Palm is taking is stupid but silly arguments don't help that overall Apple perspective either. Palm is exploiting a gap. You can bet if Apple closes that gap it will be seemless to the iPod user.
  • Reply 133 of 166
    lvidallvidal Posts: 158member
    With this type of behavior Palm goes very low, it's a shame for a company like that. Also, they only are looking to everybody as Apple "ass-smellers", and they are claiming that they are very behind Apple and innovation. In other words they are recognizing Apple as their Daddy. Stupid moves make product failures. Today they have buried their "iPhone Killer" forever.
  • Reply 134 of 166
    c4rlobc4rlob Posts: 277member
    All you Pre owners - how does it feel to realize you basically own a fake iPod??

    Your own phone says so...



  • Reply 135 of 166
    Palm for a once proud organisation now stoops to parasitic behaviour. That should be the headline. How can they hold their heads up. In order for them to survive they have to leach off Apple!
  • Reply 136 of 166
    tt92618tt92618 Posts: 444member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lvidal View Post


    With this type of behavior Palm goes very low, it's a shame for a company like that. Also, they only are looking to everybody as Apple "ass-smellers", and they are claiming that they are very behind Apple and innovation. In other words they are recognizing Apple as their Daddy. Stupid moves make product failures. Today they have buried their "iPhone Killer" forever.



    This is not a stupid move for Palm, and emulating Apple is not a 'killer' for them; it is a non-issue. Consumers don't buy products, or not buy products, because they think 'Ah! This copies Apple! Yes!' or 'No! This copies Apple! Yuck!' They often buy emotionally and impulsively, based on their perceptions of the device. How could this move 'sink' their product?



    ITunes compatibility is likely a plus for them, as long as they can maintain it.
  • Reply 137 of 166
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    None of this is a problem at all. Palm can use a third party software to use the iTunes library or actually do some work and create their own syncing software. Right now this is a clash of egos with Pre users as the loosers.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iReality85 View Post


    I see no reason why Apple shouldn't allow Palm Pre owners to sync with iTunes. After all, anyone who is well versed in strategic decision making knows that while it is good to keep your friends close (in this case, Apple's own users), it is even better to keep your enemies closer (users of products made by Apple's rivals). In other words, it behooves Apple to allow users of rivals' products (e.g. Palm Pre owners) access to iTunes. By locking those users out, Apple may inadvertently force them to look elsewhere for their media library solutions; Apple may also force the competition (Palm) to look to Microsoft (etc) for syncing solutions, or Palm may choose to innovate and compete directly with iTunes itself, which may or may not be in Apple's best interest. To automatically assert that Apple should shut its rivals out of iTunes because it is Apple's software shows a lack of strategic foresight from Apple's perspective.



  • Reply 138 of 166
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by c4rlob View Post


    All you Pre owners - how does it feel to realize you basically own a fake iPod??

    Your own phone says so...




    Why would you think they would even care as long as it works?
  • Reply 139 of 166
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Palm would provide a better experience for it's users if they actually had some control over the PC syncing software. Software they don't control and can be broken with an update is not a good situation.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tt92618 View Post


    This is not a stupid move for Palm, and emulating Apple is not a 'killer' for them; it is a non-issue. Consumers don't buy products, or not buy products, because they think 'Ah! This copies Apple! Yes!' or 'No! This copies Apple! Yuck!' They often buy emotionally and impulsively, based on their perceptions of the device. How could this move 'sink' their product?



    ITunes compatibility is likely a plus for them, as long as they can maintain it.



  • Reply 140 of 166
    hattighattig Posts: 860member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NOFEER View Post


    i'm sure apple has several pre phones to test and figure out how they hacked the itunes thing

    why don't they just sue them, its invasion of intellectual property, sure looks like palm is spitting in apples face, seems personal. i can't wait for SJ to fire back, but it will be more than a simple itunes upgrade



    I think Apple should grow up and allow an application provided with a computer purchase to sync with other people's hardware, not just Apple hardware.



    They should do this by creating a standard sync protocol that lets the device provide an icon, name, and capabilities supported to iTunes, and then iTunes can send the data supported to the device. Apple can dictate the data transmission protocols and formats.



    Let the devices stand on their own legs. The iPhone is superior, other devices are no threat - currently.
Sign In or Register to comment.