Simple math: iTunes is free and the iPhone is ~$500. Sure, it would allow Pre owners to buy from iTMS, but how much profit is that compared to the phone?
Also, why should Apple have even one employee spend any time making sure that the new version of iTunes doesn't break syncing with the Pre? It is not their concern and actually ends up costing them money on the SG&A line. That's a lose-lose for Apple.
But there should, in general and in principle be some degree of oversight, don't you think? What would you say the limits are? When should it be applied?
agreed. it's here i play armchair politician and i just claim to point out what's wrong without offering helpful solutions.
there's always grey areas that will make it a case by case issue.
as for this one in particular. itunes never purported to sync with other devices...people chose itunes because it syncs with their ipods. nobody is compelled to buy an ipod. nobody is compelled to use itunes, unless you previously owned an ipod and now you just want to use a different product...in which case you're asking a software designed to benefit a competing product to benefit the competition as well. I suppose the line would be drawn if people were compelled to use itunes in some fashion and thus forced to buy an ipod as well.
As I see all this thing is that Palm took the easy and more convenient way to do their thing but at the same time they didn't take a little respect to just talk with THE OWNER of the iTunes software (Apple) and just told them: "hey!, we have a new phone and, you know, we want your software to sync with it 'cause it's the most popular media software and we don't want to mess with a new software for our clients. So, we're going to give you this n% of our phones sales if you allow us to use it and you support our device". That's how the things are done everytime, everywhere, 'cause we are talking 'bout bussiness here, and Palm ISN'T any new, emerging, independent manufacturer who doesn't have enough money to negotiate with Apple. They should act as what they are, a big company, be mature and don't play at low level behavior like: "we are doing this thing 'cause we are the most savvy ones, no one can't stop us!", it's just plain stupid. Apple's response it's reasonably right.
That's not socialism poorly implemented, it's not even socialism at all. That's just lawmaking, pure and simple. I'm sure US IP laws have similar provisions, such as compulsory licensing, which would achieve the same result or putting the 'innovation' as you say in the hands of more people.
lawmaking is not a political philosophy. lawmaking is driven by political philosophy.
if you don't address the underlying philosophy behind the lawmaking, we're arguing two completely different things.
didn't it come pre-installed on some dells? typing "itunes pre-installed" also showed me an article saying that hp(Long time ago) pre-installed itunes .
internet explorer still comes preinstalled, as far as i know. i think the problem arises when you can't delete it and install a different program...basically elbowing out the competition
Also, what ever happened to Steve's comment "we patented the heck out of this thing" when the original iphone came out? Everyone has been ripping off Apple's concept and UI. So far no one has been challenged in court. What's up with that?
I'm all for competition - it keeps a company on it's toes. That said, do your own R and D, don't just wait to see what works then go steal it.
IP is such that in order to sue (successfully, at least), you have to show that they do it the same way you do. Even though many people love to and try mightily to sue Apple and other electronics companies for patents like "method of moving songs onto a portable device" those things never hold up because the companies' did it differently. Same for Apple -- lots of people have multi-touch but no one has done it the same way. Indeed, the iPhone touch interface is the gold standard right now.
With Palm having so many former Apple people, it does get a little dicey, especially as it's been insinuated that the Pre tricks iTunes into thinking it's an iPod. I don't know how something like the Sansa works for loading music onto it, if there's a generic software or hardware key that iTunes looks for to call it a media player, but then iPods have an extra bit of code to call it an iPod, or what. Again, I don't know, but the exact way it's done is really important. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple has someone dissecting Pre code right now to see how exactly they are accomplishing this.
OK think of it this way: Apple is trying to get people to buy their iPhone. The iPhone isn't the only thing they can grab an audience with though. iTunes is a whole other thing. Now, if a person isn't woo'd by the iPhone, Apple can still woo them with iTunes and still make a customer of some kind out of them. If that person bought a Pre over an iPhone, and Apple blocked them, they are cutting themselves off at another chance to make money off that person.
Was that clearer? lol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep
Dude You are inventing a whole big thing here, that does not exist.
Itunes was invented by apple for and is a fre download for the world.
Apple spent tens of millions to get it right. Apple spends 100's of million's running itunes every year Apple went out and signed hundred's of content suppliers. Apple never asked anyone for a dime.
You seem like a smart guy, where do you get that any thing apple does is in the public domain?
Palm should have gone out and made its own music software or joined with another music supplier like rhapsody.
Apple's Itunes has already reached over 140.000,000 million people.And if palm was smart they would knock on steve's door and say we want to use your itunes with our iphone killer.
Of the 140 million itunes users, about 25 million own mac's . The rest own windows.
I understand completely they put a lot of money into perfecting it. It pays off though. That's the point. To see a return in their investment.
Let me ask you this though: If Apple writes software for everyone, why would they want to block a certain group from taking full advantage of it? Why would they want to do something to encourage people to look elsewhere for an iTunes alternative? It doesn't make sense.
Who in their right mind says "I'm buying a Pre because it can sync with iTunes"? It's not that big of a feature, but it's cool enough of a feature that many people will definitely use it after buying their Pre.
So basically, blocking these user's won't encourage them to buy an Apple product in order to sync with iTunes, it will only have them leave iTunes.
Let me ask you this though: If Apple writes software for everyone, why would they want to block a certain group from taking full advantage of it? Why would they want to do something to encourage people to look elsewhere for an iTunes alternative? It doesn't make sense.
You know what, with all these hack friendly stories about the Pre, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple broke it, then a clever user fixed it later that day and it just went on and on like that.
If identifying an iPod is partially based in code within the iPod's firmware, will Apple force everyone to upgrade their firmware just to get iTunes to work with it?
How far will Apple go to show how worried about the Pre they are?
No offence intended, but you did write 140.000,000 million which is 140 trillion! Yes it was an intended funny, although obviously not a very successful one...
They have sold 40 Million iPod touches and iPhones (combined figure) by June 09. iPhones (original & 3G) 21.6 Million sold so thats less than 19 million touches sold.
180 million iPods sold worldwide as of Q4 2008 and is now approaching 200 million.
didn't it come pre-installed on some dells? typing "itunes pre-installed" also showed me an article saying that hp(Long time ago) pre-installed itunes .
I dunno. Maybe when hp sold those green ipods they had a pre insatll going on.
Don't stop there- imagine if Microsoft shut off all Macs from using Windows (the real biggest name in the industry) - not pretty.
That is the stupidest thingi have ever heard .
1/ MSFT IS A MAJOR stock holder in apple
2 MS hase made There office/word software for mac for a long time . How could they ever stop all those millions from using what they already own ? And if they stopped support for mac versions of Windows office/word. worse case scenirio is mac users would switch to bootcamp . after many years .
3/exactly how could anyone shut off anything ??? tell me ?
OK think of it this way: Apple is trying to get people to buy their iPhone. The iPhone isn't the only thing they can grab an audience with though. iTunes is a whole other thing. Now, if a person isn't woo'd by the iPhone, Apple can still woo them with iTunes and still make a customer of some kind out of them. If that person bought a Pre over an iPhone, and Apple blocked them, they are cutting themselves off at another chance to make money off that person.
Was that clearer? lol.
I understand completely they put a lot of money into perfecting it. It pays off though. That's the point. To see a return in their investment.
Let me ask you this though: If Apple writes software for everyone, why would they want to block a certain group from taking full advantage of it? Why would they want to do something to encourage people to look elsewhere for an iTunes alternative? It doesn't make sense.
Who in their right mind says "I'm buying a Pre because it can sync with iTunes"? It's not that big of a feature, but it's cool enough of a feature that many people will definitely use it after buying their Pre.
So basically, blocking these user's won't encourage them to buy an Apple product in order to sync with iTunes, it will only have them leave iTunes.
Apple never said block ,They warned of future non- support .
AND the itunes pitch is a major sellig point. A person who has many hard choices when buying a a phone hears itunes and it boosts that phone's image 10 fold . Its like being promised a FREE ipod with your phone purchase.
And palm brought nothing to the table, but expects apple to bend over ,
Apple will not and has never supported 3rd party vendors. Even vendor's who make ipod add-on's get screwed all the time by apple. So why would apple help a foe when they treat friends like that ?
Apple never said block ,They warned of future non- support .
AND the itunes pitch is a major sellig point. A person who has many hard choices when buying a a phone hears itunes and it boosts that phone's image 10 fold . Its like being promised a FREE ipod with your phone purchase.
And palm brought nothing to the table, but expects apple to bend over ,
Apple will not and has never supported 3rd party vendors. Even vendor's who make ipod add-on's get screwed all the time by apple. So why would apple help a foe when they treat friends like that ?
peace dude
Well perhaps I'm thinking of this the wrong way. If apple doesn't want to provide customer support of any kind, that is completely understandable and fair. If Apple wants to rewrite their software so the Pre can't sync, simply out of spite, that's shitty.
I guess I don't think of iTunes the way others do. I hate it to be honest.
Comments
Also, why should Apple have even one employee spend any time making sure that the new version of iTunes doesn't break syncing with the Pre? It is not their concern and actually ends up costing them money on the SG&A line. That's a lose-lose for Apple.
Don't stop there- imagine if Microsoft shut off all Macs from using Windows (the real biggest name in the industry) - not pretty.
How, exactly?
Agreed. Misundersanding, is all.
But there should, in general and in principle be some degree of oversight, don't you think? What would you say the limits are? When should it be applied?
agreed. it's here i play armchair politician and i just claim to point out what's wrong without offering helpful solutions.
there's always grey areas that will make it a case by case issue.
as for this one in particular. itunes never purported to sync with other devices...people chose itunes because it syncs with their ipods. nobody is compelled to buy an ipod. nobody is compelled to use itunes, unless you previously owned an ipod and now you just want to use a different product...in which case you're asking a software designed to benefit a competing product to benefit the competition as well. I suppose the line would be drawn if people were compelled to use itunes in some fashion and thus forced to buy an ipod as well.
That's not socialism poorly implemented, it's not even socialism at all. That's just lawmaking, pure and simple. I'm sure US IP laws have similar provisions, such as compulsory licensing, which would achieve the same result or putting the 'innovation' as you say in the hands of more people.
lawmaking is not a political philosophy. lawmaking is driven by political philosophy.
if you don't address the underlying philosophy behind the lawmaking, we're arguing two completely different things.
didn't it come pre-installed on some dells? typing "itunes pre-installed" also showed me an article saying that hp(Long time ago) pre-installed itunes .
internet explorer still comes preinstalled, as far as i know. i think the problem arises when you can't delete it and install a different program...basically elbowing out the competition
How, exactly?
How exactly what? Macs can boot up Windows for the last 4 years now.
Agreed!
Also, what ever happened to Steve's comment "we patented the heck out of this thing" when the original iphone came out? Everyone has been ripping off Apple's concept and UI. So far no one has been challenged in court. What's up with that?
I'm all for competition - it keeps a company on it's toes. That said, do your own R and D, don't just wait to see what works then go steal it.
IP is such that in order to sue (successfully, at least), you have to show that they do it the same way you do. Even though many people love to and try mightily to sue Apple and other electronics companies for patents like "method of moving songs onto a portable device" those things never hold up because the companies' did it differently. Same for Apple -- lots of people have multi-touch but no one has done it the same way. Indeed, the iPhone touch interface is the gold standard right now.
With Palm having so many former Apple people, it does get a little dicey, especially as it's been insinuated that the Pre tricks iTunes into thinking it's an iPod. I don't know how something like the Sansa works for loading music onto it, if there's a generic software or hardware key that iTunes looks for to call it a media player, but then iPods have an extra bit of code to call it an iPod, or what. Again, I don't know, but the exact way it's done is really important. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple has someone dissecting Pre code right now to see how exactly they are accomplishing this.
Speaking for myself, no, I don't.
It's fine with me as an Apple shareholder.
OK think of it this way: Apple is trying to get people to buy their iPhone. The iPhone isn't the only thing they can grab an audience with though. iTunes is a whole other thing. Now, if a person isn't woo'd by the iPhone, Apple can still woo them with iTunes and still make a customer of some kind out of them. If that person bought a Pre over an iPhone, and Apple blocked them, they are cutting themselves off at another chance to make money off that person.
Was that clearer? lol.
Dude You are inventing a whole big thing here, that does not exist.
Itunes was invented by apple for and is a fre download for the world.
Apple spent tens of millions to get it right. Apple spends 100's of million's running itunes every year Apple went out and signed hundred's of content suppliers. Apple never asked anyone for a dime.
You seem like a smart guy, where do you get that any thing apple does is in the public domain?
Palm should have gone out and made its own music software or joined with another music supplier like rhapsody.
Apple's Itunes has already reached over 140.000,000 million people.And if palm was smart they would knock on steve's door and say we want to use your itunes with our iphone killer.
Of the 140 million itunes users, about 25 million own mac's . The rest own windows.
I understand completely they put a lot of money into perfecting it. It pays off though. That's the point. To see a return in their investment.
Let me ask you this though: If Apple writes software for everyone, why would they want to block a certain group from taking full advantage of it? Why would they want to do something to encourage people to look elsewhere for an iTunes alternative? It doesn't make sense.
Who in their right mind says "I'm buying a Pre because it can sync with iTunes"? It's not that big of a feature, but it's cool enough of a feature that many people will definitely use it after buying their Pre.
So basically, blocking these user's won't encourage them to buy an Apple product in order to sync with iTunes, it will only have them leave iTunes.
Let me ask you this though: If Apple writes software for everyone, why would they want to block a certain group from taking full advantage of it? Why would they want to do something to encourage people to look elsewhere for an iTunes alternative? It doesn't make sense.
They're control freaks?
If identifying an iPod is partially based in code within the iPod's firmware, will Apple force everyone to upgrade their firmware just to get iTunes to work with it?
How far will Apple go to show how worried about the Pre they are?
No offence intended, but you did write 140.000,000 million which is 140 trillion! Yes it was an intended funny, although obviously not a very successful one...
No offence taken i am brain dead anyway.
ok
140.millon
140,000,000.
140 trillion
140.000.000.000
am i wrong ???
They have sold 40 Million iPod touches and iPhones (combined figure) by June 09. iPhones (original & 3G) 21.6 Million sold so thats less than 19 million touches sold.
180 million iPods sold worldwide as of Q4 2008 and is now approaching 200 million.
wow
So i wiil update my figures thanks dude.
How exactly what? Macs can boot up Windows for the last 4 years now.
Don't stop there- imagine if Microsoft shut off all Macs from using Windows (the real biggest name in the industry) - not pretty.
How would MS do this?
didn't it come pre-installed on some dells? typing "itunes pre-installed" also showed me an article saying that hp(Long time ago) pre-installed itunes .
I dunno. Maybe when hp sold those green ipods they had a pre insatll going on.
i would love to hear more about this .
peace
9
They're control freaks?
They most certainly are. And thank God for that.
Don't stop there- imagine if Microsoft shut off all Macs from using Windows (the real biggest name in the industry) - not pretty.
That is the stupidest thingi have ever heard .
1/ MSFT IS A MAJOR stock holder in apple
2 MS hase made There office/word software for mac for a long time . How could they ever stop all those millions from using what they already own ? And if they stopped support for mac versions of Windows office/word. worse case scenirio is mac users would switch to bootcamp . after many years .
3/exactly how could anyone shut off anything ??? tell me ?
How would MS do this?
It would be far easier than you think. The motherboard bios contains information that the operating system can easily read.
If computer = apple then splode!
I don't really see this as the same thing at all though when compared to what Palm is doing.
OK think of it this way: Apple is trying to get people to buy their iPhone. The iPhone isn't the only thing they can grab an audience with though. iTunes is a whole other thing. Now, if a person isn't woo'd by the iPhone, Apple can still woo them with iTunes and still make a customer of some kind out of them. If that person bought a Pre over an iPhone, and Apple blocked them, they are cutting themselves off at another chance to make money off that person.
Was that clearer? lol.
I understand completely they put a lot of money into perfecting it. It pays off though. That's the point. To see a return in their investment.
Let me ask you this though: If Apple writes software for everyone, why would they want to block a certain group from taking full advantage of it? Why would they want to do something to encourage people to look elsewhere for an iTunes alternative? It doesn't make sense.
Who in their right mind says "I'm buying a Pre because it can sync with iTunes"? It's not that big of a feature, but it's cool enough of a feature that many people will definitely use it after buying their Pre.
So basically, blocking these user's won't encourage them to buy an Apple product in order to sync with iTunes, it will only have them leave iTunes.
Apple never said block ,They warned of future non- support .
AND the itunes pitch is a major sellig point. A person who has many hard choices when buying a a phone hears itunes and it boosts that phone's image 10 fold . Its like being promised a FREE ipod with your phone purchase.
And palm brought nothing to the table, but expects apple to bend over ,
Apple will not and has never supported 3rd party vendors. Even vendor's who make ipod add-on's get screwed all the time by apple. So why would apple help a foe when they treat friends like that ?
peace dude
Apple never said block ,They warned of future non- support .
AND the itunes pitch is a major sellig point. A person who has many hard choices when buying a a phone hears itunes and it boosts that phone's image 10 fold . Its like being promised a FREE ipod with your phone purchase.
And palm brought nothing to the table, but expects apple to bend over ,
Apple will not and has never supported 3rd party vendors. Even vendor's who make ipod add-on's get screwed all the time by apple. So why would apple help a foe when they treat friends like that ?
peace dude
Well perhaps I'm thinking of this the wrong way. If apple doesn't want to provide customer support of any kind, that is completely understandable and fair. If Apple wants to rewrite their software so the Pre can't sync, simply out of spite, that's shitty.
I guess I don't think of iTunes the way others do. I hate it to be honest.