Latest Palm Pre update does not re-enable iTunes sync

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 79
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post


    On the other hand, trying to help people always look good in PR terms.



    In that case, Apple has been ?helping? other devices. They could have encrypted a file with all your media in it so that only the iTunes app could read the files or, much easier, just used an encrypted iTunes DB file that can only be read by the iTunes app itself so that any and every device could easily parse the simple XML file structure of your collection will all your ratings and other data.
  • Reply 62 of 79
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post


    Don't you get that little red exclamation point to report spam and abuse and the like? It is on the bottom left near the online/offline indicator...



    Wow thank you! I feel pretty dumb for not recognizing that as the flag post icon. Maybe it should be near all the reply/edit tools? Anyway, thanks!
  • Reply 63 of 79
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by VinitaBoy View Post


    @ chronster



    "It just sucks that Apple feels the need to alienate pre owners . . . ."



    Uh, perhaps it's just me, but why would Apple give a rat's ass what any Pre owner thinks? Didn't that person already "alienate" Apple by purchasing an iPhone competitor, a truly inferior one that does not possess a legitimate iTunes option? Do you REALLY believe that any company should go out of its way to "be nice" to a competitor by enabling its bottom line in this fashion? Such is not the way of the business world I live in. Is it in yours?



    Oh grow up you child and put the Cool Aid down - many Apple customers may want to buy an alternative phone to the iPhone, for a lot of reasons. Not all Mac users are iPhone users and vice versa.



    Apple has often bragged about interoperability, in fact AI has done many articles about it, and here we have an example of them abusing their market dominance in a way they, and probably most of us on this board, have accused Microsoft. Personally I'm getting tired of it.



    And before you accuse me of something stupid, I have an iPhone, probably had my first Apple computer before you were born, I have a Mac (and, shock-horror a PC too), I have Apple TV and have spent more than $5,000 on iTunes since it was launched. But maybe I'll want a Pre next year and still be able to listen to my music.



    As much as I despise Microsoft, at least they license their technology out... you can't even BUY the right to connect to iTunes.



    Having said all that, Apple do have the right to block the Pre... but as anyone with any sense knows, have the right to do something doesn't make it right to do so.
  • Reply 64 of 79
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post


    Oh grow up you child and put the Cool Aid down - many Apple customers may want to buy an alternative phone to the iPhone, for a lot of reasons. Not all Mac users are iPhone users and vice versa.



    Apple has often bragged about interoperability, in fact AI has done many articles about it, and here we have an example of them abusing their market dominance in a way they, and probably most of us on this board, have accused Microsoft. Personally I'm getting tired of it.



    And before you accuse me of something stupid, I have an iPhone, probably had my first Apple computer before you were born, I have a Mac (and, shock-horror a PC too), I have Apple TV and have spent more than $5,000 on iTunes since it was launched. But maybe I'll want a Pre next year and still be able to listen to my music.



    As much as I despise Microsoft, at least they license their technology out... you can't even BUY the right to connect to iTunes.



    Having said all that, Apple do have the right to block the Pre... but as anyone with any sense knows, have the right to do something doesn't make it right to do so.



    Isn't the Pre interoperable with both Mac and PC? Where's the interoperability problem? Can one not put their iTunes music on the Pre? That is more than they can do with their Zune Pass music is it not?



    If I buy an Epson printer and my wife buys a Canon, should Epson make their software interoperable with the Canon printer? What if the Epson software was head and shoulders above everything else on the market? Why should other companies have to write their own software when Epson's is so much better? Doesn't Epson know that I am one of their loyal customers even though I buy other branded printers from time to time? Shouldn't they be fostering my good will by allowing my Canon to work with the superior Epson software?



    In the same way the Apple wrote iTunes to sell iDevices, they wrote OS X to sell Macs. Buying a Dell means you do not get all of the advantages of owning OS X. You can sample Safari and QuickTime and even iTunes on your Dell, but you do not get the whole Mac experience. Buy something other that an iDevice and you will not get all of the functionality of iDevice software/hardware integration. You can still use iTunes. You just can't have the seamless sync experience. I honestly do not get why this is so hard to understand.
  • Reply 65 of 79
    thomprthompr Posts: 1,516member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post


    Some third party software will come out to make it happen. Like markspace did for the original Palm and Trio products, their sync product was far better then what Apple of Palm ever did.



    The only reason apple is being pissy about it is due to the fact the people doing this are x-apple employees.



    I guarantee you Apple has a much larger reason to do this than just being pissy. The iTunes store and its nice synching capability is one of the great discriminators for iPod, iPhone, etc, versus the competition. There's NO WAY they are going to just give away a major discriminators.



    Thompson
  • Reply 66 of 79
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by quinney View Post


    I notice that they raised about $360 million today in a stock offering. That should last them

    awhile, but I still think they would love to be acquired.



    They may have raised $360 million, but haven't they been operating in the red for some time now? This injection of new money smells like a desperation move. They probably need it to make payroll.
  • Reply 67 of 79
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post


    i say everyone go buy a Pre and then return it for this reason



    That wouldn't be a free exercise. You have to sign up for phone & data service with it, and there is probably a non-refundable signup fee of about $30 to do so.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Whatever happened to offering us, the users, a way to flag this trash and get these guys knocked off the boards quicker?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by technohermit View Post


    Probably because they were in a non-compete clause to boot.



    California doesn't allow non-compete.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JupiterOne View Post


    Why do you think Pre owners can't buy music and videos from iTunes?



    You're not going to get iTunes video working on Pre.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gimpymw View Post


    Yeah.



    You and the other Pre owner can go in the corner and cry me a river.



    AND STOP JERKING THOSE THINGS!



    Stop jerking what things?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post


    Don't you get that little red exclamation point to report spam and abuse and the like? It is on the bottom left near the online/offline indicator...



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by technohermit View Post


    Wow thank you! I feel pretty dumb for not recognizing that as the flag post icon. Maybe it should be near all the reply/edit tools? Anyway, thanks!



    It's somewhat obtuse, but then, the icon does make sense once you know what it is. Every icon has a mouse over description.
  • Reply 68 of 79
    Apple wants to lock people in to the iPod/iTunes ecosystem, which is fair enough. They're also being competitive (or non-competitive depending on how you look at it) by not allowing other manufacturers to sync their products with iTunes directly, only allowing them to use the xml file. This is also fair enough, since it's all business. Competition isn't meant to be nice and doesn't always benefit end users, we can see that since web standards are such a mess right now. It's also why iTunes and Safari suck on Windows and Office stinks on the Mac.



    I wonder why Apple even let competitors use the xml file to sync with iTunes though? I doubt they did this purely out of the goodness of their hearts. I'm guessing there must be some rules in place about open-ness, would these extend to the iTunes software itself perhaps. I do think iTunes could stand to be more open in terms of file formats - why can't I play movies from my camera on my phone without encoding them first?



    + a quick question for the extreme Apple supporters: if this was the camera market and Apple was the main player, would you be happy with iPhoto only supporting Apple cameras? Although purely hypothetical (and not a very good comparison) what I am trying to say is that closed systems aren't always great.
  • Reply 69 of 79
    Finally. Palm should just come up with their own syncing methods and stop leeching off others.
  • Reply 70 of 79
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vandil View Post


    Cue the Class Action Lawsuit for selling the Pre with the bullet-point promise of iTunes sync in 3.... 2.... 1....



    0!!! Palm flopped again!
  • Reply 71 of 79
    Apple did do enough to get Palm working on the platform, but Palm did treat their users badly.

    Software from 1800 or so. Even in the past Palm was lazy, they still are. Try to steal knowledge and effort from others.

    Palm - Think different - Work Prehistoric ( with clubs )
  • Reply 72 of 79
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by _Rick_V_ View Post


    Palm is absolutely right: users should have the "freedom and choice" to transfer media to their device



    Exactly, I agree 100%. And that's what the XML file is for. And RIM and other device manufacturers seem to agree, seeing as they are using this OFFICIAL channel.
  • Reply 73 of 79
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    The issue is the Pre spoofed an iPod, by feeding misleading information via USB in order to sync.



    That is as wrong as someone walking into a bank disguised as someone else and attempting to draw money out.



    Other devices are free to use iTunes files but not by disguising themselves as Apple products.



    There are alternative methods Palm can make use of.
  • Reply 74 of 79
    I don't mind pre owners accessing itunes. In fact, I think it might be good for Apple that pre-owners have access to iTunes to purchase items from it.

    However, palm just wants a free lunch. go make your own eco-system!
  • Reply 75 of 79
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Robodude View Post


    a quick question for the extreme Apple supporters: if this was the camera market and Apple was the main player, would you be happy with iPhoto only supporting Apple cameras? Although purely hypothetical (and not a very good comparison) what I am trying to say is that closed systems aren't always great.



    A worthy question.



    Yes. I would be happy if iPhoto syncing became an iCamera exclusive. Understand iPhoto is here, at least in part, because camera makers refused to support the Mac with software that they included for the PC. Like so many great developments on the Mac, it is a result of manufactures leaving Mac users in the cold. Apple had to do the work because no one else would. If Apple makes a camera that is better than everything else out there and provides proprietary software like everyone else, that is perfectly fine with me. By not providing support for the Mac, electronics manufactures may be sealing their own fate.
  • Reply 76 of 79
    piotpiot Posts: 1,346member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post


    An argument or two from you would be nice, but either way I don't see anything unfortunate there.



    Quote:

    From my point of view, Palm comes out of this clean and makes Apple look evil.



    Sure. Palm have been reprimanded by a standards body yet you say they are "clean".



    Apple are protecting their business interests. They have done nothing technically, legally or morally wrong yet you say they look "evil".



    Quote:

    Don't forget this is not really about Palm, but about iPod/iTunes users who happen to prefer Pre to iPhone



    If Palm is so concerned with iTunes users why didn't they give them a piece of software that worked?



    I just think that it's 'unfortunate' that you choose to employ the current "Apple is Evil" meme. A movement started by a bunch of internet pundits with a vested interest in Apple's competitors who seem to resent and misunderstand the company's success and popularity.



    Just my 'point of view'.
  • Reply 77 of 79
    successsuccess Posts: 1,039member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    I hope it's a nice premium on top of the current price. Would be nice. I might sound like a traitor, but I do try not to confuse my investing decisions with my consumption decisions -- I had bought a bunch of PALM at $10! Thought it was a better bet than the Pre.



    So then you're a trader not a traitor.
  • Reply 78 of 79
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,733member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Last week, Palm said it intends to respond to the USB-IF, noting that it believes consumers should have "freedom and choice" when transferring media to personal devices.



    Palm has the freedom to choose to develop their own media syncing application.



    Pretty pathetic for the company that pioneered data sync between computer and handheld to be leeching off of another companies work.



    Freeloading jerks...
  • Reply 79 of 79
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,733member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post


    Apple has often bragged about interoperability, in fact AI has done many articles about it, and here we have an example of them abusing their market dominance in a way they, and probably most of us on this board, have accused Microsoft. Personally I'm getting tired of it.



    Apple is interoperable. The iTunes xml file isn't encrypted - indeed there are multiple third party applications that utilize it with no interference from Apple. Palm could do the same if they choose. They are either unwilling or unable to do so. That's not Apple's problem. Why should Apple stand by and let Palm co-opt their work? How is Apple preventing a vendor from stealing from them "abusing market dominance"?!?



    Quote:

    But maybe I'll want a Pre next year and still be able to listen to my music.



    Then maybe you should hold Palm accountable for providing you a way to do so. Expecting Apple to carry you for free isn't very reasonable.



    Quote:

    As much as I despise Microsoft, at least they license their technology out... you can't even BUY the right to connect to iTunes.



    Really? How many former Plays4Sure "partners" have access to the Zune store? And that's just one example. Talk about myopic vision...



    Quote:

    Having said all that, Apple do have the right to block the Pre... but as anyone with any sense knows, have the right to do something doesn't make it right to do so.



    Why isn't it the right thing to do? They are blocking the Pre from lying that it's an iPod and using iTunes. If they want to develop their own syncing software they are certainly able to do so.



    The ball is firmly in Palm's court. If you are going to be pissy with anyone, it's Palm - period.
Sign In or Register to comment.