We kinda knew Palm was Bush-league from the start, what with Elevation Partners keeping it a hairs-breadth away from certain death.
But really, this latest move by Palm proves it.
I swear it really seems Rubinstein is still working for Apple. Otherwise the grudge he might hold against his former employers has driven him quite insane.
The real nail in the Palm coffin here is the lack of precedent for what they're doing (because what they are doing to their brand and to their customers is insane) and the existence of overwhelming evidence for alternative sync methods: RIM has found a way, and there are other methods to sync as well. But Palm wants to give users the "full iTunes experience", which they did not create and have no rights to. Insane.
Are you drunk? Palm Pre users can purchase as much iTunes music as they like, just like they can from Amazon. They can drag in onto the Pre and listen to it as they wish. If you want all the advantages of an iPhone, you will just have to buy an iPhone. This is so hysterical, I will quote it again.
Palm has done a great job at brainwashing.
Does this propaganda appear in the box of the Pre, or do you have to go into special clinics to have it done?
I never have or owned a Pre! I own an Iphone! You are right and my statement is wrong, you can buy and use on other things - now, if you buy non-DRM and pay extra. So if you can drag it what is so good about not allowing a synch routine work for all players?
Short answer: Itunes Music Store has a dominant market share of over 70% and they refuse to sell music to Palm Pre and any other brand.
Longer:
In fact there is evidence pointing to that they did stop the synching! First, Palm had a proceedure which did not spoof vendor ID. Apple changes something so it stopped working. Then Palm spoofed the vendor.
But I can also agree that if there are good open interfaces to ITunes then Palm could use that. I doubt there is. If so this is merely a discussion of methods.
I may be ignorant of many things. And the law is for courts to interpret. But the Microsoft vs Commision case is a direct application of Article 82 and I think it is analogous. Microsoft tied Media player into dominant Windows, and Apple ties dominant online "music selling" into ipods. I may be wrong but I think industry knows that Apple/Itunes/App Store is the dominant player and you do too. Itunes Store has more than 70% of download music market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero
I never have or owned a Pre! I own an Iphone! You are right and my statement is wrong, you can buy and use on other things - now, if you buy non-DRM and pay extra. So if you can drag it what is so good about not allowing a synch routine work for all players?
Please stop you are giving me brain acne, just to read your continued search to be right. You are shown to be inaccurate in your opinions. Its okay to have opinions and it is okay to be wrong in your opinions, since we all are not prefect and know everything. What is hard to understand is someone that has been provided evidence that his opinions are wrong and continues down the path to try and enlighten us.
Btw: You told me I was ignorant of the law initially and implied that you knew it better!! so now do not not reply, the law is for courts to interpret.
If you had just provided your opinions without using the 'personal touch' of calling me ignorant, I would have let your comments go, since everyone has an opinion, but you decided that you knew best, which is not the case.
Sorry for the personal attack, but assuming you didn't know (much) about anti-competetive law, it was not ment as one. I simply wanted to state that there's more to anti-competetive law than offering choice. As you and Patrickwalker both may agree with.
There may be a long way before there is a clear case against Apple but I and many other Apple consumers can clearly *feel* their anti-competetive behaviour. In the computer market, Apple plays a different game of being underdog and promoting open standards (html 5 etc). I guess I wish to see more of that.
It's still an appalling over-reaction that marks you as both a meaner and more inhuman person than the burglar is likely to be.
Personally, I like to think I'm better than the average burglar, not worse.
Let me guess? You're American?
let me guess...you've never been robbed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Well America is a bit more barbaric than other countries, but I think you are just being way over the top with the exaggerations here, (and just to win a petty argument with a stranger!).
Most burglars take the time to figure out when you aren't going to be home before they break in. Even in the USA, most burglars are also not killers, and most will run away when confronted, but actually confronting a burglar in your home is a really, really dumb thing to do.
My point was that responding to someone stealing from you, by purposely blowing them away just so you can feel like a man, is cowardly, stupid and "over-the-top" reaction-wise.
You make a lot of generalizations about burglars. The fact is, when one is in your house, it's dark, you can't take time to assess what they're after, their psycology, or their armament.
do you also criticize policemen for taking body shots instead of shooting the leg?
the fact is, in high stress situations, you do whatever you can to neutralize the target. sure most burglars fall into the categories you state, but there are some that don't fit that mold. take that risk if you want, but you don't subdue a burglar until the police come, you don't chase them out. you simply have no idea what they're capable of.
and you're making a logical fallacy by putting words into his mouth. all he said was he shoots a burglar that comes into his home. you've extrapolated that by assigning machismo motives and calling him a coward. bad form.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtdunham
Damn straight. But if I knock the guy out, i'm not gonna proceed to beat him to death. That seemed to be the tenor of the post that started this dialogue.
I beg to differ. you were reading far too much into the "tenor" of the post that started this. the guy simply compared bricking a pre to "shooting a burglar." nothing about killing, murder, death, sadism, or anything that others are assigning to him.
Finally, i find gazoobee's rank nationalism to be appalling; claiming that america is a bit more barbaric than other countries is absolutely indefensible and cannot be backed up by anything other than biased opinion. perpetuating american stereotypes in that manner is arrogant, prejudiced, and shows a lack of education and understanding, not just about americans, but about the world in general. the fact that such stereotypes accuse americans of arrogance yet depend on arrogance themselves, shows that such character traits are not american tendencies, they are human tendencies.
remember when english colonists accused native americans of being barbarians, then proceeded to nearly eliminate them? there is meaning behind the phrase "takes one to know one."
in simplest terms, you're just as much a prick as the people you deign to accuse of the same.
I never have or owned a Pre! I own an Iphone! You are right and my statement is wrong, you can buy and use on other things - now, if you buy non-DRM and pay extra. So if you can drag it what is so good about not allowing a synch routine work for all players?
Since you own an iPhone, you know what it is to have a seamless sync experience between all your important data on you computer and your phone. Before the iPhone, there was no such experience. You have come to take it for granted. Companies like Palm would kill for that experience. Clearly, they are willing to steal and risk their reputation for it. iTunes sync is a HUGE deal. Let no one tell you otherwise.
Please stop you are giving me brain acne, just to read your continued search to be right. You are shown to be inaccurate in your opinions. Its okay to have opinions and it is okay to be wrong in your opinions, since we all are not prefect and know everything. What is hard to understand is someone that has been provided evidence that his opinions are wrong and continues down the path to try and enlighten us.
Are you a politician by any chance
This turns into semantics it seems. Facts can be wrong and I will easy admit if I am wrong about facts. Opinions are subjective and cannot be wrong.
I do now know the facts of what exactly Apple did or Palm did but I *believe* Apple made a deliberate change to disable the sync with Palm pre. My opinion *is* that this is bad practice of Apple, which is enterly subjective and no thing has been presented that makes me change my view. Everyone can, as you say, have their opinon.
This turns into semantics it seems. Facts can be wrong and I will easy admit if I am wrong about facts. Opinions are subjective and cannot be wrong.
I do now know the facts of what exactly Apple did or Palm did but I *believe* Apple made a deliberate change to disable the sync with Palm pre. My opinion *is* that this is bad practice of Apple, which is enterly subjective and no thing has been presented that makes me change my view. Everyone can, as you say, have their opinon.
Since you own an iPhone, you know what it is to have a seamless sync experience between all your important data on you computer and your phone. Before the iPhone, there was no such experience. You have come to take it for granted. Companies like Palm would kill for that experience. Clearly, they are willing to steal and risk their reputation for it. iTunes sync is a HUGE deal. Let no one tell you otherwise.
Here, I agree with you completely -- except for one thing-- which is just a annecdotal twist in the Palm/Apple discussion, the "Before the iPhone, there was no such experience" is not on the spot. Did you se the original first Palm Pilot with the Hotsync software? It was the first 1996.
Sorry for the personal attack, but assuming you didn't know (much) about anti-competetive law, it was not ment as one. I simply wanted to state that there's more to anti-competetive law than offering choice. As you and Patrickwalker both may agree with.
There may be a long way before there is a clear case against Apple but I and many other Apple consumers can clearly *feel* their anti-competetive behaviour. In the computer market, Apple plays a different game of being underdog and promoting open standards (html 5 etc). I guess I wish to see more of that.
Oh well you keep *feeling* that way and I will wait for the appropriate commission or government to actually show me by law that is the case.
Here, I agree with you completely -- except for one thing-- which is just a annecdotal twist in the Palm/Apple discussion, the "Before the iPhone, there was no such experience" is not on the spot. Did you se the original first Palm Pilot with the Hotsync software? It was the first 1996.
Unfortunately that was only released on windows (windows 95, windows 3.1) v2 of desktop sync software supported windows 98 and NT. No Mac version was released until much latter. I never bought one for that reason.
Actually just thinking about it name a phone that does have seamless sync experience before iPhone release across Mac/Win platforms.
This turns into semantics it seems. Facts can be wrong and I will easy admit if I am wrong about facts. Opinions are subjective and cannot be wrong.
Oh yeah?! If I state, ?I believe that the world is flat.? all that would be true in this example is my belief that the world is flat, but my ?opinion? is not free from scrutiny or being infallible simply because I state it as my opinion.
Quote:
I do now know the facts of what exactly Apple did or Palm did but I *believe* Apple made a deliberate change to disable the sync with Palm pre. My opinion *is* that this is bad practice of Apple, which is enterly subjective and no thing has been presented that makes me change my view. Everyone can, as you say, have their opinon.
Then learn the facts! This has been discussed since before the Pre was launched, back when Palm advertised Pre syncing with iTunes.
Yes, Apple is deliberately changing the iTunes app so that non-iPods aren?t showing up in iTunes with false USB IDs, including Apple's USB Vendor ID, Product ID, Manufacturer ID, and even false iPod serial numbers. You think this is good for Palm?s customers to be treated this way when Apple has gone out of their way to make the iTunes file and DB very open and well documented so that any PMP can connect and sync the contents of the iTunes folders and info? RiM has a great app for syncing with the well documented and open iTunes XML file written in plain text. Apple could have encrypted this if they were going to be asses about it, but they didn?t, but you think they need to go that extra mile and support the Palm Pre in iTunes and to abolish the idea that a device shouldn?t pretend to be another device. Let?s go back to the part where you stated, "I do now know the facts?. Perhaps now you?ll do a little research before posting your opinions.
I used unprecise language. It does not have to be a monopoly, but when you have a dominant market share, you have special obligations in both US and EU law.
I think the term in US law is "Market Power". Everyone tends to think of "monopoly" in terms of Microsoft's 90% or 95%. Market power or dominance is enough to get a company into trouble. I don't believe there is a finite 'number' that has to be passed. The courts decide that.
Quote:
The market where Apple rules is, as everyone know, the ipods. So the tying practice that can anti-competetive is connecting things to ipods.
I think that is a mistake. One cannot define the market as "iPods". A few years ago you might have been able to define the market as "portable MP3 players. After video... maybe "Portable Media Players". Now the market is "portable media players including media capable phones". That was the whole idea behind my previous post.
Quote:
Also now the size of the market "internet music selling" business of Apple is also looking dominant in terms of market share.
Although this adds another layer of complexity to the matter It may or may not be relevant. Just one example: The Palm Pre has an Amazon MP3 Store client on the phone itself! I think Palm would have a tough sell trying to prove that not having access to iTunes denied their customers access to digital music.
Quote:
You are right about these critical questions and again in a case it would be about defining "markets" and "dominant" players according to Apple's och Palm's views. In my view and the rest of the industry it *is* without doubt Apple that is the incumbent, looking at ipods and the universe around them!
The rest of the industry? What do you mean Microsoft with the Zune and Windows Mobile? Rim and Blackberrys? Nokia, Sony Erricsson, Carrier branded phones, Creative, Samsung, HTC, Archos, Motorola, San Disc, Cowan and many more...?
There are hundreds of personal media products, from dozens of other vendors. Cumulatively (even in the US) their sales outweigh sales of all iPods and iPhones. None of them appear to "need" iTunes to work properly. Indeed a large number of them seem to sync with Windows Media Player. Perhaps WMP is the 'incumbent"?
NOTE: Even if you want to define the market in your "own terms" Apple's share of ANY market in Europe is not the same as in the US. Sales of all of Apple's product lines have a heavy slant to north America.
For Apple to get into ant-trust legal difficulties a number of criteria have to be met.
One has to define the market(s)
Does Apple have market power?
Are they abusing that power?
Are there insurmountable "barriers to entry" to the market?
(ie. how hard is it for Rim to build and sell cell phones and computer sync software? How hard is it for Amazon, Real, Napster and eMusic to build MP3 stores? ... and Microsoft to build a complete iTunes/iPod clone ecosystem?)
Quote:
But I think Apple will grow (because of good engineering) and then case becomes more clear.
You appear to be backtracking.
Quote:
.... monopolistic anti-competetive apple tactics....
Does Apple have that market power now and are they abusing it? Or is this going to happen at some future date?
Quote:
And I think Apple, we, and the world would gain if all systems were more open. Let all PMPs buy music and sync trough Itunes store/itunes. Let all ipods/iphones have open synch interface to allow any software to interoperate on Mac/Windows/Linux/etc.
I was obviously mistaken. I thought you wanted more competition. Not less.
Here, I agree with you completely -- except for one thing-- which is just a annecdotal twist in the Palm/Apple discussion, the "Before the iPhone, there was no such experience" is not on the spot. Did you se the original first Palm Pilot with the Hotsync software? It was the first 1996.
I know about Hotsync. IMO, there is no way the experience is the same as iTunes. Also, there is the little matter of Hotsync being a proprietary Palm solution for devices running the PalmOS. Palm's understanding that a proprietary sync solution should be open to all comers, is a very new epiphany.
It would be a ridiculous over-reaction that says more about the general nastiness of the shooter than it does the burglar, and often leads to the complete destruction of everything the shooter was trying to defend in the first place.
Note to all burglars ... you are hereby invited to "visit" the premises of this posters home ... no penalty required.
No, Apple is not contractually bound by "their content providers" to keep music off other devices. lol
It's funny that you take such offense to a very minor hack on an Apple product yet you guys are so proud of your jailbroken iPwone or Touch. Just tell me that none of you have thought about jailbreaking.
I love my ipod and my Macbook. Apple does a great job making excellent products to use inside their ecosystem.
However, I also love my Palm Pre. Why does Apple feel they have to keep other excellent devices from working with their ecosystem? That just plain limits choice and hurts competition and ultimately customer experience.
"No, no! We can't have an alternative dialer or video app on the iPhone!"
"No, no we can't let people access their paid for, DRM free music via the playlists and software they are used to. We don't want to sell them any songs or anything."
Apple is being very petty about this. They are willing to lose the revenue for content that 800,000+ and increasing Palm Pre users would spend on iTunes because Stevie boy is pissed at John Rubinstein for joining Palm and Ed Collagen for turning down the "no hire" pact and hiring Apple employees.
Personally, I don't care if iTunes syncs with my Pre. I have a Nano for music. But it takes Palm an hour to fix every time and show exactly what type of a company Apple is every time they break it.
Who is the petty company here? Apple for sure. Palm is just poking them in the ribs and laughing. As they should.
--- BTW, if Apple were to intentionally brick a Pre they would be sued big time. The only way to do this would be to write some nasty code that wipes the ROM. Big, big lawsuit. And that brings me to another point. You folks say "Apple should just sue Palm." That's fine. And then Apple can quit using Palm intellectual property and you can lose you ringer switch functionality and all of your PIM syncing with your desktops. Yeah, Palm has patents on all that stuff. I didn't see them suing Apple. Maybe they are just a little more willing to compete and a little more consumer friendly. eh?
Tell you what ... why don't you spend your time and money to develop something that everyone wants and is willing to pay for only to watch the guy down the street hack it and put it on his device to start making money for himself instead ... then let's see if you're still so so willin to "share".
Why wouldn't Apple sue Palm over this? Simple. Because they'd lose. Lose big.
Let's face it, Apple has a virtual monopoly over digital music. The hardware, the sync software, and the marketplace.
Given this, it is becoming increasingly difficult for competing products to survive without offering compatibility with the dominant ecosystem that Apple has created. Props to Apple, this is a sign of your success. HOWEVER, let's consider for a moment that Apple is Microsoft and only allows Internet Explorer to function - competitor's browsers are purposely disabled by one method or another. Or even, Apple is Microsoft and they decide to disable any digital media player (yes, even the iPod) aside from their own Zune product. In either of this scenarios, there's no question that Microsoft would be in trouble, so what makes everyone here think that Apple can get away with this forever? I personally see any sort of legal action by Apple against Palm to result in large scale exposure of the anti-competitive nature of the iTunes ecosystem and an eventual disruption of the closed environment that apple (and apparently so many people here) covet so much.
Is Palm without fault? Of course not. Spoofing vendor and device ID's is bad. Bad Palm. But Apple isn't exactly in a good light here either folks..
EDIT: And by the way..calling the Pre a "dud" or "failure" is pretty dumb. Does it measure up to the incredible success of the iPhone? Of course not. No recent product has. However I'm sure most (if not all) of the people here can agree that if there was no iPhone, the Pre is the next best thing. I'd hardly call that a failure.
You just don't get it , do you... Apple is NOT keeping iTunes away from all users that don't own an Apple product .. check out how many windows users using iTunes. They just get, rightfully so, pissed off with companies who are too lazy to develop their own software for doing so and instead try to "trick" their device into thinking it's an iPod to work properly .... I'm starting to believe that all these Palm supporters are the same people who think that it's completely and morally right to pirate other peoples work! ... unless, of course, it's YOUR work that's getting stolen!
Comments
But really, this latest move by Palm proves it.
I swear it really seems Rubinstein is still working for Apple. Otherwise the grudge he might hold against his former employers has driven him quite insane.
The real nail in the Palm coffin here is the lack of precedent for what they're doing (because what they are doing to their brand and to their customers is insane) and the existence of overwhelming evidence for alternative sync methods: RIM has found a way, and there are other methods to sync as well. But Palm wants to give users the "full iTunes experience", which they did not create and have no rights to. Insane.
Are you drunk? Palm Pre users can purchase as much iTunes music as they like, just like they can from Amazon. They can drag in onto the Pre and listen to it as they wish. If you want all the advantages of an iPhone, you will just have to buy an iPhone. This is so hysterical, I will quote it again.
Palm has done a great job at brainwashing.
Does this propaganda appear in the box of the Pre, or do you have to go into special clinics to have it done?
I never have or owned a Pre! I own an Iphone! You are right and my statement is wrong, you can buy and use on other things - now, if you buy non-DRM and pay extra. So if you can drag it what is so good about not allowing a synch routine work for all players?
Short answer: Itunes Music Store has a dominant market share of over 70% and they refuse to sell music to Palm Pre and any other brand.
Longer:
In fact there is evidence pointing to that they did stop the synching! First, Palm had a proceedure which did not spoof vendor ID. Apple changes something so it stopped working. Then Palm spoofed the vendor.
But I can also agree that if there are good open interfaces to ITunes then Palm could use that. I doubt there is. If so this is merely a discussion of methods.
I may be ignorant of many things. And the law is for courts to interpret. But the Microsoft vs Commision case is a direct application of Article 82 and I think it is analogous. Microsoft tied Media player into dominant Windows, and Apple ties dominant online "music selling" into ipods. I may be wrong but I think industry knows that Apple/Itunes/App Store is the dominant player and you do too. Itunes Store has more than 70% of download music market.
I never have or owned a Pre! I own an Iphone! You are right and my statement is wrong, you can buy and use on other things - now, if you buy non-DRM and pay extra. So if you can drag it what is so good about not allowing a synch routine work for all players?
Please stop you are giving me brain acne, just to read your continued search to be right. You are shown to be inaccurate in your opinions. Its okay to have opinions and it is okay to be wrong in your opinions, since we all are not prefect and know everything. What is hard to understand is someone that has been provided evidence that his opinions are wrong and continues down the path to try and enlighten us.
Are you a politician by any chance
Btw: You told me I was ignorant of the law initially and implied that you knew it better!! so now do not not reply, the law is for courts to interpret.
If you had just provided your opinions without using the 'personal touch' of calling me ignorant, I would have let your comments go, since everyone has an opinion, but you decided that you knew best, which is not the case.
Sorry for the personal attack, but assuming you didn't know (much) about anti-competetive law, it was not ment as one. I simply wanted to state that there's more to anti-competetive law than offering choice. As you and Patrickwalker both may agree with.
There may be a long way before there is a clear case against Apple but I and many other Apple consumers can clearly *feel* their anti-competetive behaviour. In the computer market, Apple plays a different game of being underdog and promoting open standards (html 5 etc). I guess I wish to see more of that.
Palm wants to give users the "full iTunes experience", which they did not create and have no rights to. Insane.
Me thinks Jon Rubenstein isn't really in charge and it's DVD Jon instead.
It's still an appalling over-reaction that marks you as both a meaner and more inhuman person than the burglar is likely to be.
Personally, I like to think I'm better than the average burglar, not worse.
Let me guess? You're American?
let me guess...you've never been robbed?
Well America is a bit more barbaric than other countries, but I think you are just being way over the top with the exaggerations here, (and just to win a petty argument with a stranger!).
Most burglars take the time to figure out when you aren't going to be home before they break in. Even in the USA, most burglars are also not killers, and most will run away when confronted, but actually confronting a burglar in your home is a really, really dumb thing to do.
My point was that responding to someone stealing from you, by purposely blowing them away just so you can feel like a man, is cowardly, stupid and "over-the-top" reaction-wise.
You make a lot of generalizations about burglars. The fact is, when one is in your house, it's dark, you can't take time to assess what they're after, their psycology, or their armament.
do you also criticize policemen for taking body shots instead of shooting the leg?
the fact is, in high stress situations, you do whatever you can to neutralize the target. sure most burglars fall into the categories you state, but there are some that don't fit that mold. take that risk if you want, but you don't subdue a burglar until the police come, you don't chase them out. you simply have no idea what they're capable of.
and you're making a logical fallacy by putting words into his mouth. all he said was he shoots a burglar that comes into his home. you've extrapolated that by assigning machismo motives and calling him a coward. bad form.
Damn straight. But if I knock the guy out, i'm not gonna proceed to beat him to death. That seemed to be the tenor of the post that started this dialogue.
I beg to differ. you were reading far too much into the "tenor" of the post that started this. the guy simply compared bricking a pre to "shooting a burglar." nothing about killing, murder, death, sadism, or anything that others are assigning to him.
Finally, i find gazoobee's rank nationalism to be appalling; claiming that america is a bit more barbaric than other countries is absolutely indefensible and cannot be backed up by anything other than biased opinion. perpetuating american stereotypes in that manner is arrogant, prejudiced, and shows a lack of education and understanding, not just about americans, but about the world in general. the fact that such stereotypes accuse americans of arrogance yet depend on arrogance themselves, shows that such character traits are not american tendencies, they are human tendencies.
remember when english colonists accused native americans of being barbarians, then proceeded to nearly eliminate them? there is meaning behind the phrase "takes one to know one."
in simplest terms, you're just as much a prick as the people you deign to accuse of the same.
I never have or owned a Pre! I own an Iphone! You are right and my statement is wrong, you can buy and use on other things - now, if you buy non-DRM and pay extra. So if you can drag it what is so good about not allowing a synch routine work for all players?
Since you own an iPhone, you know what it is to have a seamless sync experience between all your important data on you computer and your phone. Before the iPhone, there was no such experience. You have come to take it for granted. Companies like Palm would kill for that experience. Clearly, they are willing to steal and risk their reputation for it. iTunes sync is a HUGE deal. Let no one tell you otherwise.
Please stop you are giving me brain acne, just to read your continued search to be right. You are shown to be inaccurate in your opinions. Its okay to have opinions and it is okay to be wrong in your opinions, since we all are not prefect and know everything. What is hard to understand is someone that has been provided evidence that his opinions are wrong and continues down the path to try and enlighten us.
Are you a politician by any chance
This turns into semantics it seems. Facts can be wrong and I will easy admit if I am wrong about facts. Opinions are subjective and cannot be wrong.
I do now know the facts of what exactly Apple did or Palm did but I *believe* Apple made a deliberate change to disable the sync with Palm pre. My opinion *is* that this is bad practice of Apple, which is enterly subjective and no thing has been presented that makes me change my view. Everyone can, as you say, have their opinon.
This turns into semantics it seems. Facts can be wrong and I will easy admit if I am wrong about facts. Opinions are subjective and cannot be wrong.
I do now know the facts of what exactly Apple did or Palm did but I *believe* Apple made a deliberate change to disable the sync with Palm pre. My opinion *is* that this is bad practice of Apple, which is enterly subjective and no thing has been presented that makes me change my view. Everyone can, as you say, have their opinon.
Just one simple reply 'opinions can be wrong'
Since you own an iPhone, you know what it is to have a seamless sync experience between all your important data on you computer and your phone. Before the iPhone, there was no such experience. You have come to take it for granted. Companies like Palm would kill for that experience. Clearly, they are willing to steal and risk their reputation for it. iTunes sync is a HUGE deal. Let no one tell you otherwise.
Here, I agree with you completely -- except for one thing-- which is just a annecdotal twist in the Palm/Apple discussion, the "Before the iPhone, there was no such experience" is not on the spot. Did you se the original first Palm Pilot with the Hotsync software? It was the first 1996.
Sorry for the personal attack, but assuming you didn't know (much) about anti-competetive law, it was not ment as one. I simply wanted to state that there's more to anti-competetive law than offering choice. As you and Patrickwalker both may agree with.
There may be a long way before there is a clear case against Apple but I and many other Apple consumers can clearly *feel* their anti-competetive behaviour. In the computer market, Apple plays a different game of being underdog and promoting open standards (html 5 etc). I guess I wish to see more of that.
Oh well you keep *feeling* that way and I will wait for the appropriate commission or government to actually show me by law that is the case.
Here, I agree with you completely -- except for one thing-- which is just a annecdotal twist in the Palm/Apple discussion, the "Before the iPhone, there was no such experience" is not on the spot. Did you se the original first Palm Pilot with the Hotsync software? It was the first 1996.
Unfortunately that was only released on windows (windows 95, windows 3.1) v2 of desktop sync software supported windows 98 and NT. No Mac version was released until much latter. I never bought one for that reason.
Actually just thinking about it name a phone that does have seamless sync experience before iPhone release across Mac/Win platforms.
This turns into semantics it seems. Facts can be wrong and I will easy admit if I am wrong about facts. Opinions are subjective and cannot be wrong.
Oh yeah?! If I state, ?I believe that the world is flat.? all that would be true in this example is my belief that the world is flat, but my ?opinion? is not free from scrutiny or being infallible simply because I state it as my opinion.
I do now know the facts of what exactly Apple did or Palm did but I *believe* Apple made a deliberate change to disable the sync with Palm pre. My opinion *is* that this is bad practice of Apple, which is enterly subjective and no thing has been presented that makes me change my view. Everyone can, as you say, have their opinon.
Then learn the facts! This has been discussed since before the Pre was launched, back when Palm advertised Pre syncing with iTunes.
Yes, Apple is deliberately changing the iTunes app so that non-iPods aren?t showing up in iTunes with false USB IDs, including Apple's USB Vendor ID, Product ID, Manufacturer ID, and even false iPod serial numbers. You think this is good for Palm?s customers to be treated this way when Apple has gone out of their way to make the iTunes file and DB very open and well documented so that any PMP can connect and sync the contents of the iTunes folders and info? RiM has a great app for syncing with the well documented and open iTunes XML file written in plain text. Apple could have encrypted this if they were going to be asses about it, but they didn?t, but you think they need to go that extra mile and support the Palm Pre in iTunes and to abolish the idea that a device shouldn?t pretend to be another device. Let?s go back to the part where you stated, "I do now know the facts?. Perhaps now you?ll do a little research before posting your opinions.
I used unprecise language. It does not have to be a monopoly, but when you have a dominant market share, you have special obligations in both US and EU law.
I think the term in US law is "Market Power". Everyone tends to think of "monopoly" in terms of Microsoft's 90% or 95%. Market power or dominance is enough to get a company into trouble. I don't believe there is a finite 'number' that has to be passed. The courts decide that.
The market where Apple rules is, as everyone know, the ipods. So the tying practice that can anti-competetive is connecting things to ipods.
I think that is a mistake. One cannot define the market as "iPods". A few years ago you might have been able to define the market as "portable MP3 players. After video... maybe "Portable Media Players". Now the market is "portable media players including media capable phones". That was the whole idea behind my previous post.
Also now the size of the market "internet music selling" business of Apple is also looking dominant in terms of market share.
Although this adds another layer of complexity to the matter It may or may not be relevant. Just one example: The Palm Pre has an Amazon MP3 Store client on the phone itself! I think Palm would have a tough sell trying to prove that not having access to iTunes denied their customers access to digital music.
You are right about these critical questions and again in a case it would be about defining "markets" and "dominant" players according to Apple's och Palm's views. In my view and the rest of the industry it *is* without doubt Apple that is the incumbent, looking at ipods and the universe around them!
The rest of the industry? What do you mean Microsoft with the Zune and Windows Mobile? Rim and Blackberrys? Nokia, Sony Erricsson, Carrier branded phones, Creative, Samsung, HTC, Archos, Motorola, San Disc, Cowan and many more...?
There are hundreds of personal media products, from dozens of other vendors. Cumulatively (even in the US) their sales outweigh sales of all iPods and iPhones. None of them appear to "need" iTunes to work properly. Indeed a large number of them seem to sync with Windows Media Player. Perhaps WMP is the 'incumbent"?
NOTE: Even if you want to define the market in your "own terms" Apple's share of ANY market in Europe is not the same as in the US. Sales of all of Apple's product lines have a heavy slant to north America.
For Apple to get into ant-trust legal difficulties a number of criteria have to be met.
One has to define the market(s)
Does Apple have market power?
Are they abusing that power?
Are there insurmountable "barriers to entry" to the market?
(ie. how hard is it for Rim to build and sell cell phones and computer sync software? How hard is it for Amazon, Real, Napster and eMusic to build MP3 stores? ... and Microsoft to build a complete iTunes/iPod clone ecosystem?)
But I think Apple will grow (because of good engineering) and then case becomes more clear.
You appear to be backtracking.
.... monopolistic anti-competetive apple tactics....
Does Apple have that market power now and are they abusing it? Or is this going to happen at some future date?
And I think Apple, we, and the world would gain if all systems were more open. Let all PMPs buy music and sync trough Itunes store/itunes. Let all ipods/iphones have open synch interface to allow any software to interoperate on Mac/Windows/Linux/etc.
I was obviously mistaken. I thought you wanted more competition. Not less.
Here, I agree with you completely -- except for one thing-- which is just a annecdotal twist in the Palm/Apple discussion, the "Before the iPhone, there was no such experience" is not on the spot. Did you se the original first Palm Pilot with the Hotsync software? It was the first 1996.
I know about Hotsync. IMO, there is no way the experience is the same as iTunes. Also, there is the little matter of Hotsync being a proprietary Palm solution for devices running the PalmOS. Palm's understanding that a proprietary sync solution should be open to all comers, is a very new epiphany.
You know it *would* be like "shooting a burglar."
It would be a ridiculous over-reaction that says more about the general nastiness of the shooter than it does the burglar, and often leads to the complete destruction of everything the shooter was trying to defend in the first place.
Note to all burglars ... you are hereby invited to "visit" the premises of this posters home ... no penalty required.
lol. You guys are cracking me up!
No, Apple is not contractually bound by "their content providers" to keep music off other devices. lol
It's funny that you take such offense to a very minor hack on an Apple product yet you guys are so proud of your jailbroken iPwone or Touch. Just tell me that none of you have thought about jailbreaking.
I love my ipod and my Macbook. Apple does a great job making excellent products to use inside their ecosystem.
However, I also love my Palm Pre. Why does Apple feel they have to keep other excellent devices from working with their ecosystem? That just plain limits choice and hurts competition and ultimately customer experience.
"No, no! We can't have an alternative dialer or video app on the iPhone!"
"No, no we can't let people access their paid for, DRM free music via the playlists and software they are used to. We don't want to sell them any songs or anything."
Apple is being very petty about this. They are willing to lose the revenue for content that 800,000+ and increasing Palm Pre users would spend on iTunes because Stevie boy is pissed at John Rubinstein for joining Palm and Ed Collagen for turning down the "no hire" pact and hiring Apple employees.
Personally, I don't care if iTunes syncs with my Pre. I have a Nano for music. But it takes Palm an hour to fix every time and show exactly what type of a company Apple is every time they break it.
Who is the petty company here? Apple for sure. Palm is just poking them in the ribs and laughing. As they should.
--- BTW, if Apple were to intentionally brick a Pre they would be sued big time. The only way to do this would be to write some nasty code that wipes the ROM. Big, big lawsuit. And that brings me to another point. You folks say "Apple should just sue Palm." That's fine. And then Apple can quit using Palm intellectual property and you can lose you ringer switch functionality and all of your PIM syncing with your desktops. Yeah, Palm has patents on all that stuff. I didn't see them suing Apple. Maybe they are just a little more willing to compete and a little more consumer friendly. eh?
Tell you what ... why don't you spend your time and money to develop something that everyone wants and is willing to pay for only to watch the guy down the street hack it and put it on his device to start making money for himself instead ... then let's see if you're still so so willin to "share".
Why wouldn't Apple sue Palm over this? Simple. Because they'd lose. Lose big.
Let's face it, Apple has a virtual monopoly over digital music. The hardware, the sync software, and the marketplace.
Given this, it is becoming increasingly difficult for competing products to survive without offering compatibility with the dominant ecosystem that Apple has created. Props to Apple, this is a sign of your success. HOWEVER, let's consider for a moment that Apple is Microsoft and only allows Internet Explorer to function - competitor's browsers are purposely disabled by one method or another. Or even, Apple is Microsoft and they decide to disable any digital media player (yes, even the iPod) aside from their own Zune product. In either of this scenarios, there's no question that Microsoft would be in trouble, so what makes everyone here think that Apple can get away with this forever? I personally see any sort of legal action by Apple against Palm to result in large scale exposure of the anti-competitive nature of the iTunes ecosystem and an eventual disruption of the closed environment that apple (and apparently so many people here) covet so much.
Is Palm without fault? Of course not. Spoofing vendor and device ID's is bad. Bad Palm. But Apple isn't exactly in a good light here either folks..
EDIT: And by the way..calling the Pre a "dud" or "failure" is pretty dumb. Does it measure up to the incredible success of the iPhone? Of course not. No recent product has. However I'm sure most (if not all) of the people here can agree that if there was no iPhone, the Pre is the next best thing. I'd hardly call that a failure.
You just don't get it , do you... Apple is NOT keeping iTunes away from all users that don't own an Apple product .. check out how many windows users using iTunes. They just get, rightfully so, pissed off with companies who are too lazy to develop their own software for doing so and instead try to "trick" their device into thinking it's an iPod to work properly .... I'm starting to believe that all these Palm supporters are the same people who think that it's completely and morally right to pirate other peoples work! ... unless, of course, it's YOUR work that's getting stolen!
what if it's your drunken neighbour who missed his driveway?
At least he wouldn't be drinking and driving any more.