With iTunes 9, Apple again disables Palm Pre sync

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2014
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.
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 94
    Yes! Very good job, Apple! May Palm die off with their stupid "iCOPYAPPLE" methods and products and their stupid traitor employees who develop ways to gain share form Apple! PALM FAILED AGAIN!
  • Reply 2 of 94
    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.
  • Reply 3 of 94
    parkyparky Posts: 383member
    Palm, if you want to succeed then develop your own software, don't leech of the back of others.



    It is unfair to your customers, and that is your responsibility NOT Apple who owe them nothing.



    You sold the product, you should support it, not expect others to do so.



    It is no use saying 'Apple get revenue from the iTunes Store for Pre Users'.

    That is a cop out and you know it.

    There will be many pre owners who just use iTunes to sync their own ripped content to the Pre, without buying a single thing from Apple.



    Use the money YOU get from the sale of YOUR products to develop software for the Pre.
  • Reply 4 of 94
    aplnubaplnub Posts: 2,586member
    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.



    iSync????
  • Reply 5 of 94
    parkyparky Posts: 383member
    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.



    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.
  • Reply 6 of 94
    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.



    There are many alternatives for Palm to sync Pre with iTunes music, but unfortunately they chose to go down this road (and even brag about it) instead of writing a proper software. They are really doing their customers a favour (or not).
  • Reply 7 of 94
    kotatsukotatsu Posts: 1,010member
    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.
  • Reply 8 of 94
    jlljll Posts: 2,709member
    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.



    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.
  • Reply 9 of 94
    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.

    • iTunes synced with the iPod/iPhone only from a time when it was minority in the desktop media player market, so it can continue to do so as nothing underhanded has been done.

    • Product tie-in is perfectly legal.

    • Microsoft released a "0% market share product" (IE) with a "95%+ market share product" (Windows), thereby creating an instant 95%+ market share web browser.

    • That and they did things to break Netscape's interaction with Windows.

    So, no they are not even remotely similar.
  • Reply 10 of 94
    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.



    I gather you keep your front door open so that anybody could just walk in at anytime and use your facilities?



    Perhaps you could post your address? I am sure some would appreciate your generosity.



    I certainly would applaud it. But take advantage of it? Not on my life!
  • Reply 11 of 94
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post


    Would it really dent your ego so much to open iTunes up to any device through an API?



    That would hurt iTunes, the reason things happen so slowly in Microsoft/Windows land is because of all the compatibility issues they have to check. Apple can move and adapt faster because supporting ~20 devices is easier than supporting hundreds.



    Look at all the hassle with Windows Mobile, even though it has an API. Things are far from perfect over there, admittedly that has also been hindered by Microsoft setting unrealistically low minimum specs for Windows Mobile devices. But, it's far from rosy in Microsoft's corner of the world.





    Quote:

    Open standards = good.



    Don't confuse open standards with an API, they aren't the same. Windows has an API, and "open standards" definitely doesn't belong in the same sentence as "Windows".
  • Reply 12 of 94
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by parky View Post


    Palm, if you want to succeed then develop your own software, don't leech of the back of others.



    Is it leeching, or just using what just popular? So your saying palm owners should manage their music in iTunes (being Mac people), and then use (say) palmtunes to organize music a second time in order to get music on their palm? Then abandon that next year for berrytunes when they happen to change phones again to a blackberry, and need different proprietary music sync software?



    I don't see it as leeching. I see it as using existing software that all mac and may PC owners have and letting them use their existing software to sync music to their phone ratehr than have to install yet another app to duplicate functionality
  • Reply 13 of 94
    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.



    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.
  • Reply 14 of 94
    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 system software as far as I am aware. It's just an application.
  • Reply 15 of 94
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by johnmcboston View Post


    Is it leeching, or just using what just popular? So your saying palm owners should manage their music in iTunes (being Mac people), and then use (say) palmtunes to organize music a second time in order to get music on their palm? Then abandon that next year for berrytunes when they happen to change phones again to a blackberry, and need different proprietary music sync software?



    I don't see it as leeching. I see it as using existing software that all mac and may PC owners have and letting them use their existing software to sync music to their phone ratehr than have to install yet another app to duplicate functionality



    Yes, it is leeching, and for a reason most everyone on here is forgetting. Palm is making iTunes recognize the Pre as " "mass storage device manufactured by Apple" called an iPod." Palm is blatantly ripping off Apple in this regard. I have no problem with other devices being able to sync to iTunes (example: RIM developed their own software to interface with iTunes), but I don't see how what Palm is doing is even legal! Calling a Palm Pre an iPod that is manufactured by Apple? Tell me how that is not sketchy in the slightest.
  • Reply 16 of 94
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by parky View Post


    Palm, if you want to succeed then develop your own software, don't leech of the back of others.



    It is unfair to your customers, and that is your responsibility NOT Apple who owe them nothing.



    You sold the product, you should support it, not expect others to do so.



    It is no use saying 'Apple get revenue from the iTunes Store for Pre Users'.

    That is a cop out and you know it.

    There will be many pre owners who just use iTunes to sync their own ripped content to the Pre, without buying a single thing from Apple.



    Use the money YOU get from the sale of YOUR products to develop software for the Pre.



    +1. Palm is nothing but exactly like MS. A copynut.
  • Reply 17 of 94
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hittrj01 View Post


    Yes, it is leeching, and for a reason most everyone on here is forgetting. Palm is making iTunes recognize the Pre as " "mass storage device manufactured by Apple" called an iPod." Palm is blatantly ripping off Apple in this regard. I have no problem with other devices being able to sync to iTunes (example: RIM developed their own software to interface with iTunes), but I don't see how what Palm is doing is even legal! Calling a Palm Pre an iPod that is manufactured by Apple? Tell me how that is not sketchy in the slightest.



    I don't understand why Apple dosen't sue them for that. It's blatantly going against rights!
  • Reply 18 of 94
    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.



    Yup. At least BB does not copy but creates its own support. Palm= Losers
  • Reply 19 of 94
    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.



    Did you not read that I said that Apple would design a standard protocol for media sync from iTunes, and that other manufacturers could implement it themselves? They could even pay a licensing fee to use it.



    However I think that iTunes compatibility would be a necessary feature in any media device, and thus this would benefit Apple in the long run.



    Or maybe iPhoto should only support the iPhone and iPod Nano?
  • Reply 20 of 94
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    I gather you keep your front door open so that anybody could just walk in at anytime and use your facilities?



    Perhaps you could post your address? I am sure some would appreciate your generosity.



    I certainly would applaud it. But take advantage of it? Not on my life!



    See now you are "disabling" the thieves from breaking in by locking your door. How unfair of you.



    I find AppleInsiders use of words very interesting. By saying disable they are making it seem like Apple allowed the Pre to sync on purpose and then just stopped. For everyone screaming about a standard interface and the world should be allowed to use iTunes to sync with whatever mp3 player they have needs to relax. Apple is not going to test all these devices to make sure they work with each release.



    That would be the same as saying my Honda engine doesn't want to work with this Chevy transmission I found at the junkyard. There I have had my 2 cents worth so if you really want your device to work with iTunes all the time get an apple product else please stop whinging about it.
Sign In or Register to comment.