MS isn't even in minor stockholder in Apple and it's funny that this point isn't even the most misguided part of that post.
When apple was selling at pre split price of $7.50 >> MSFT bought 150 million worth of apple stock.
FINE major went to far but large share holder is correct. The point being MSFT wishes apple to do well well in sales.They always did. MSFT makes a ton pf moony on Office/Word for apple. So they would never pull the plug on apple . ok.
What a bunch of bull, does Microsoft allow the Zune software to sync with Palm Pre, why isn't there outrage over that, why isn't Palm making this a feature of their phone, they just want to hitch onto the biggest name in the industry.
I'd like to add that there is no Zune software for Mac. You need third-party software to stream to the 360.
When apple was selling at pre split price of $7.50 >> MSFT bought 150 million worth of apple stock.
FINE major went to far but large share holder is correct. The point being MSFT wishes apple to do well well in sales.They always did. MSFT makes a ton pf moony on Office/Word for apple. So they would never pull the plug on apple . ok.
Any thing else you find fault with ??
bring it on dude.
Microsoft sold off that stock a long, long time ago. They have no "plug" they can pull to hurt Apple.
Im in two minds, on one hand I agree Apple wrote iTunes so they should be able to do with it what they want. On the other why does Apple get to do whatever they want when MS can't? iTunes comes with every Mac already installed and they've turned it into the main piece of software for syncing with devices despite there being another program (iSync) that does this. If that isn't using there position to gain an unfair competitive advantage what is?
Its been mentioned that how would anyone know if Apple deliberately stop making the Pre sync. Well kinda simple there will suddenly be a software update for all the iPODs that haven't had one in years. I have two iPODs neither of which have received any software update from Apple in a long time. If the Pre is using the same methods to sync as one of them Apple wouldn't have any way to stop the Pre working without releasing random updates for older products.
People seem to fail to mention the investment apple made in iTunes, R&D is NOT cheap, the fact that Palm wants to step in and piggy back on something apple spent millions if not tens of millions of dollars developing and refining is a major issue here, if it wasn't for the hack to sync with iTunes, how much longer would it have taken Palm to push the Pre to market, something else that should be considered.
This is big business this isn't "oh they should just let them use it".
The argument about CDs / Sony CD Players etc., has nothing to do with this, there are different formats for CDs and there is a standard that comes out of it and companies produce that standard of CD and the produce drives that use that standard of CD, this has nothing to do with a piece of software used for syncing a companies product.
All apple has to do is incorporate small automatic updates to iTunes on a regular basis that don't work with Pre for whatever reason, not Apple's fault as they have stated they make no claims in supporting anything other then their own hardware, how many patches can Palm push out before people get tired of having to update their software so they can' sink with iTunes, that is the big question.
Again, if Redmond used this excuse to blacklist iPods from Windows, this board would go all kinds of crazy. I've used a Mac exclusively since the first Classic days, which is probably why I remember what Arrogant Apple was like when 10% marketshare came around.
But frank, you still miss the point that even if Apple did specifically break Pre access to iTunes (and they have not, nor did they say the would), that isn't the same thing as 'blacklisting' pre devices from Mac OS.
You are correct, I think, that if Windows did that everyone would go ape. But what if MS did not support iPods and iPhones on, say, their Zune marketplace? Would everyone go ape then? Would you? If so, you should start now, because you cannot synch an iPod to Zune marketplace, just like you cannot synch a Zune to iTunes.
The bottom line is that it is the responsibility of device manufacturers to provide synch software for their devices. Operating systems like Windows and Mac OS provide APIs so that these vendors can write this software, and responsible vendors use those APIs to write their own synch utilities.
What you are arguing is that Apple should take the synching utility that they wrote for their own hardware, and also allow other devices to synch with it, and that it ought to be compulsory. The equivalent of that on Windows would be if MS had to take Zune marketplace and ActiveSynch and make them work for everyone. For that matter, to be fair, anyone writing a synch utility should be forced to support everyone's hardware. For example, if Palm were to write synch for Mac OS, it would also have to synch iPods and iPhones.
What you are arguing is that Apple should take the synching utility that they wrote for their own hardware, and also allow other devices to synch with it, and that it ought to be compulsory. The equivalent of that on Windows would be if MS had to take Zune marketplace and ActiveSynch and make them work for everyone. For that matter, to be fair, anyone writing a synch utility should be forced to support everyone's hardware. For example, if Palm were to write synch for Mac OS, it would also have to synch iPods and iPhones.
Perhaps the real point to be made is that it's not illegal to make something to interoperate with something else, so there's no real argument about whether Palm should or should not. Following on from that, why not provide the API to permit this to happen, because if Apple does manage to "inadvertently" break it, a fix will be devised, rinse and repeat.
Begs the question - why would Palm want to 'integrate' with iTunes?
(from wikipedia)
Market share
* Steve Jobs announced in his "It's Showtime" keynote that Apple had 88% of the legal U.S. music download market on September 12, 2006.[44]
* Apple announced that the iTunes Store had sold more than two million movies, making it the world?s most popular online movie store on April 11, 2007.[53]
* Apple announced that iTunes Store surpassed Best Buy to become the second biggest music seller in the USA behind Wal-Mart on February 26, 2008 and eventually became number one on April 3, 2008.[1]
Because it the biggest marketplace for music, that's why. This is not withstanding any irrelevant notion that the store makes little profit.
That's not socialism. The Competition Bureau exists to enforce that the Capitalist system is not perverted by illegal monopoly actions. Call Obama, he'll tell you how regulation is a good thing.
I have no desire to call Obama.
To say this isn't socialism, you have to argue that this is not, in fact, taking someone's intellectual property/innovation and forcing them to share it with everyone. Simply saying "that's not socialism" just doesn't cut it.
If you came out and said "hey, you know it is socialism and i think it's a good idea." we could respectfully disagree.
Begs the question - why would Palm want to 'integrate' with iTunes?
[snip]
Because it the biggest marketplace for music, that's why. This is not withstanding any irrelevant notion that the store makes little profit.
I don't disagree with you at all; I think it is perfectly clear why Palm would want to sync with iTunes. Why Apple would view such as a positive development and embrace it, as some here have suggested, is what eludes me. Anything that reduces sales of Apple's hardware reduces its margin, and hence its profit. I can understand why Apple might be a bit lukewarm on the idea.
My own view is this: While I'm not sure there is much Apple could do to effectively block Palm from syncing with iTunes, I think Palm was a bit irresponsible in making iTunes compatibility a part of the marketing of their device. Doing so creates an expectation on the part of consumers that this ability is a part of the device's feature set, as opposed to some nifty trick Palm figured out; users will expect that Palm will maintain this capability, and Palm has not effectively communicated to users that they don't have an effective way of ensuring that they can because they have no control over what Apple does with the software.
This is an interesting move I will say that; I wonder what the people in Cupertino think about this. It's a big PR headache for sure. On the one hand, if Apple does break it, then Palm can scream bloody murder and accuse them of doing it intentionally. And, if it is true that Apple cannot legally punish Palm for building this ability into their devices, then the move kind of grabs Apple where it counts because it very nearly forces them to make sure they don't break it. On the other hand, failing to do anything just exposes Apple to more of this in the future from other manufacturers wanting to jump on the train. It was a pretty nervy move on Palm's part.
Totally agree. If Microsoft pulled a stunt like this; they would probably be slammed for anti-competitive laws. Apple is free to change their implementation granted; but breaking other business on purpose is something else. For a while now; people have been asking for a more open system (DRM-free music) now they want device independence. I think that's a fair request provided Apple doesn't need to do anything extra.
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius
My opinion is that it's piss poor decision on Apple's part. iTunes is a central piece of OS X software and as such should not be locked to Apple's hardware alone. If Microsoft were to announce that Windows Media Player was only going to allow syncing with Zunes, people on here would be crying foul and screaming about MS's monopolistic policies. I have the same feeling about other pieces of Apple software like iMovie that provides encoding presets only for Apple products and YouTube. Apple's desire for complete control wears a bit thin at times.
Well, Apple did all the hard work to made iTunes an effective yet easy-to-use software. It don't think it'll accept any other company making profit using their hard work (and not even paying for it). Plus, if Palm really wants to succeed, it should be fully equipped (the phone and the software). Using iTunes compatibility as a selling point is 'stealing' in my opinion.
But yes, I agree with you on the fact that Apple has some extra-tight controls. But then again, I am happy with what Apple offers. So, these tight controls do not interfere with my requirements. And that's all that is: Personal choices.
Cheers.
And how is that different from say Adobe using OS-X's software? Same dumb thing. They re-use the things Apple offered to the crowds that have it. This ain't any different.
Palm had their Palm Desktop and Hotsync software to do just that. The only thing I could think of is perhaps Palm realized their own package is such a steaming pile of garbage that their only option was to hitch a ride on iTunes. Perhaps this was a stopgap measure to give Palm enough time to come up with their own full-blown desktop module. It comes to no surprise that Apple is putting the warning out there.
Of course, Pre owners will be the one to complain about Apple if/when that break occurs when they should actually be pointing the finger right back at Palm. Shame on Palm/Rubenstein for even advertising that ability as a feature.
Let's put it this way... Unless Apple breaks support for the iPhone, iPod or whatever Palm latches as; I don't see how Apple can change anything that will break the Pre. Unless Apple is planning to ship new firmware on the oldest iPods ever just to break the device (HELLO Anti-trust)
Haha; I'm a shareholder too; and I still think this is a bad idea. Think about it. If you can connect to your fav. music store; it means you wil most likely buy your music from there. So Apple makes money of Pre owners that latch onto iTunes. If iTunes doesn't work with their Pre; Why would they even bother using iTunes in the first place!?
There's been speculation that Palm did this to bait Apple into an anti-trust case and I think today's statement might give them some ammunition. The best play should have been to do nothing.
BINGO. Someone with a thinking brain in here . Clearly this is Antitrust matierial. Apple purposely breaks it and it's gonna hurt!
I agree that it's a piss poor decision on Apple's part to announce this. However in comparison, Microsoft's Zune Marketplace is Zune specific...worse yet after they developed and marketed Played-For-Sure.
Totally agree with ya. But there's a huge difference here. Zune store only works with Zunes. Apple's iTunes only worked with i-products (That's the same shit). The difference here is that a third company could easily masquerade as a Zune and read it's database (no one cares about the Zune marketplace). That would effectively be equivalent. The fact that MS wrote their code to work with their device is the same case as Apple.
Why doesn't Palm just arrange a license deal with Apple? Then, Apple could benefit from the success of their rival. There really is a market big enough, given that the iPhone is exclusive to a single carrier in a given market, for most countries. I know that iTunes isn't really a money maker for Apple, but the more sold, the more profitable it would be on top of the license fees.
I think that heavy handed attempts at keeping iTunes exclusive might bring in some antitrust issues that Apple may not want.
Long story short.. .Palm doesn't need to pay anything to Apple today and can get away with it
I'm an Apple fan as much as the next guy, but I don't understand this. Pre owners are using a free software, and buying Apple's music (most of the time). Besides, why would people buy the Pre over the iPhone? Multiple reasons, many of which are deal breakers for these people. These people could easily use other software and buy their music elsewhere, but they are instead buying it from Apple! If you aren't going to make money off the phone, why turn down the money from the songs?
My two cents.
Another kudo to someone with a brain in here vs zealous Apple rah-rah non-sense. You can still be a fan and have some level of objectivity. I like to think that I do too.
Honestly, it blows me away that a big company would produce a piece of hardware that pretty much relies on someone else's software to do "it's thing".... Palm, catch a clue and have some coffee...!! Apple isn't going to let you use their software. Why should they? They are in competition with Palm and there is no reason to share Itunes as a sync method. What are all of these palm owners going to do when suddenly they can't sync their "pre?" I hope it turns into a class action law suit that gets serious media coverage just for pure entertainment purposes! Stupid PALM!
If you think that the Pre relies on this software; think again. You are severely miss-informed. Unlike the iPhone; the Pre can work as a USB drive.
Comments
This thread
MS isn't even in minor stockholder in Apple and it's funny that this point isn't even the most misguided part of that post.
When apple was selling at pre split price of $7.50 >> MSFT bought 150 million worth of apple stock.
FINE major went to far but large share holder is correct. The point being MSFT wishes apple to do well well in sales.They always did. MSFT makes a ton pf moony on Office/Word for apple. So they would never pull the plug on apple . ok.
Any thing else you find fault with ??
bring it on dude.
What a bunch of bull, does Microsoft allow the Zune software to sync with Palm Pre, why isn't there outrage over that, why isn't Palm making this a feature of their phone, they just want to hitch onto the biggest name in the industry.
I'd like to add that there is no Zune software for Mac. You need third-party software to stream to the 360.
When apple was selling at pre split price of $7.50 >> MSFT bought 150 million worth of apple stock.
FINE major went to far but large share holder is correct. The point being MSFT wishes apple to do well well in sales.They always did. MSFT makes a ton pf moony on Office/Word for apple. So they would never pull the plug on apple . ok.
Any thing else you find fault with ??
bring it on dude.
Microsoft sold off that stock a long, long time ago. They have no "plug" they can pull to hurt Apple.
Its been mentioned that how would anyone know if Apple deliberately stop making the Pre sync. Well kinda simple there will suddenly be a software update for all the iPODs that haven't had one in years. I have two iPODs neither of which have received any software update from Apple in a long time. If the Pre is using the same methods to sync as one of them Apple wouldn't have any way to stop the Pre working without releasing random updates for older products.
This is big business this isn't "oh they should just let them use it".
The argument about CDs / Sony CD Players etc., has nothing to do with this, there are different formats for CDs and there is a standard that comes out of it and companies produce that standard of CD and the produce drives that use that standard of CD, this has nothing to do with a piece of software used for syncing a companies product.
All apple has to do is incorporate small automatic updates to iTunes on a regular basis that don't work with Pre for whatever reason, not Apple's fault as they have stated they make no claims in supporting anything other then their own hardware, how many patches can Palm push out before people get tired of having to update their software so they can' sink with iTunes, that is the big question.
That is the stupidest thingi have ever heard .
1/ MSFT IS A MAJOR stock holder in apple
No, they are no and they never were a major shareholder. I doubt MS currently owns any Apple stock.
In '97, they did purchase $150 million worth of non-voting stock.
That was converted to 18 million shares of common stock and in 2003, Apple had ~370 million shares outstanding, so MS was not a "major" shareholder.
When apple was selling at pre split price of $7.50 >> MSFT bought 150 million worth of apple stock.
And that was sold immediately after the 5 years that was agreed upon by Apple/MS.
No, they are no and they never were a major shareholder. I doubt MS currently owns any Apple stock.
In '97, they did purchase $150 million worth of non-voting stock.
That was converted to 18 million shares of common stock and in 2003, Apple had ~370 million shares outstanding, so MS was not a "major" shareholder.
And that was sold immediately after the 5 years that was agreed upon by Apple/MS.
I stand corrected. Thank you.
I wonder how mush msft got for all that stock.
9
Again, if Redmond used this excuse to blacklist iPods from Windows, this board would go all kinds of crazy. I've used a Mac exclusively since the first Classic days, which is probably why I remember what Arrogant Apple was like when 10% marketshare came around.
But frank, you still miss the point that even if Apple did specifically break Pre access to iTunes (and they have not, nor did they say the would), that isn't the same thing as 'blacklisting' pre devices from Mac OS.
You are correct, I think, that if Windows did that everyone would go ape. But what if MS did not support iPods and iPhones on, say, their Zune marketplace? Would everyone go ape then? Would you? If so, you should start now, because you cannot synch an iPod to Zune marketplace, just like you cannot synch a Zune to iTunes.
The bottom line is that it is the responsibility of device manufacturers to provide synch software for their devices. Operating systems like Windows and Mac OS provide APIs so that these vendors can write this software, and responsible vendors use those APIs to write their own synch utilities.
What you are arguing is that Apple should take the synching utility that they wrote for their own hardware, and also allow other devices to synch with it, and that it ought to be compulsory. The equivalent of that on Windows would be if MS had to take Zune marketplace and ActiveSynch and make them work for everyone. For that matter, to be fair, anyone writing a synch utility should be forced to support everyone's hardware. For example, if Palm were to write synch for Mac OS, it would also have to synch iPods and iPhones.
What you are arguing is that Apple should take the synching utility that they wrote for their own hardware, and also allow other devices to synch with it, and that it ought to be compulsory. The equivalent of that on Windows would be if MS had to take Zune marketplace and ActiveSynch and make them work for everyone. For that matter, to be fair, anyone writing a synch utility should be forced to support everyone's hardware. For example, if Palm were to write synch for Mac OS, it would also have to synch iPods and iPhones.
Perhaps the real point to be made is that it's not illegal to make something to interoperate with something else, so there's no real argument about whether Palm should or should not. Following on from that, why not provide the API to permit this to happen, because if Apple does manage to "inadvertently" break it, a fix will be devised, rinse and repeat.
Begs the question - why would Palm want to 'integrate' with iTunes?
(from wikipedia)
Market share
* Steve Jobs announced in his "It's Showtime" keynote that Apple had 88% of the legal U.S. music download market on September 12, 2006.[44]
* Apple announced that the iTunes Store had sold more than two million movies, making it the world?s most popular online movie store on April 11, 2007.[53]
* Apple announced that iTunes Store surpassed Best Buy to become the second biggest music seller in the USA behind Wal-Mart on February 26, 2008 and eventually became number one on April 3, 2008.[1]
Because it the biggest marketplace for music, that's why. This is not withstanding any irrelevant notion that the store makes little profit.
That's not socialism. The Competition Bureau exists to enforce that the Capitalist system is not perverted by illegal monopoly actions. Call Obama, he'll tell you how regulation is a good thing.
I have no desire to call Obama.
To say this isn't socialism, you have to argue that this is not, in fact, taking someone's intellectual property/innovation and forcing them to share it with everyone. Simply saying "that's not socialism" just doesn't cut it.
If you came out and said "hey, you know it is socialism and i think it's a good idea." we could respectfully disagree.
Begs the question - why would Palm want to 'integrate' with iTunes?
[snip]
Because it the biggest marketplace for music, that's why. This is not withstanding any irrelevant notion that the store makes little profit.
I don't disagree with you at all; I think it is perfectly clear why Palm would want to sync with iTunes. Why Apple would view such as a positive development and embrace it, as some here have suggested, is what eludes me. Anything that reduces sales of Apple's hardware reduces its margin, and hence its profit. I can understand why Apple might be a bit lukewarm on the idea.
My own view is this: While I'm not sure there is much Apple could do to effectively block Palm from syncing with iTunes, I think Palm was a bit irresponsible in making iTunes compatibility a part of the marketing of their device. Doing so creates an expectation on the part of consumers that this ability is a part of the device's feature set, as opposed to some nifty trick Palm figured out; users will expect that Palm will maintain this capability, and Palm has not effectively communicated to users that they don't have an effective way of ensuring that they can because they have no control over what Apple does with the software.
This is an interesting move I will say that; I wonder what the people in Cupertino think about this. It's a big PR headache for sure. On the one hand, if Apple does break it, then Palm can scream bloody murder and accuse them of doing it intentionally. And, if it is true that Apple cannot legally punish Palm for building this ability into their devices, then the move kind of grabs Apple where it counts because it very nearly forces them to make sure they don't break it. On the other hand, failing to do anything just exposes Apple to more of this in the future from other manufacturers wanting to jump on the train. It was a pretty nervy move on Palm's part.
My opinion is that it's piss poor decision on Apple's part. iTunes is a central piece of OS X software and as such should not be locked to Apple's hardware alone. If Microsoft were to announce that Windows Media Player was only going to allow syncing with Zunes, people on here would be crying foul and screaming about MS's monopolistic policies. I have the same feeling about other pieces of Apple software like iMovie that provides encoding presets only for Apple products and YouTube. Apple's desire for complete control wears a bit thin at times.
Well, Apple did all the hard work to made iTunes an effective yet easy-to-use software. It don't think it'll accept any other company making profit using their hard work (and not even paying for it). Plus, if Palm really wants to succeed, it should be fully equipped (the phone and the software). Using iTunes compatibility as a selling point is 'stealing' in my opinion.
But yes, I agree with you on the fact that Apple has some extra-tight controls. But then again, I am happy with what Apple offers. So, these tight controls do not interfere with my requirements. And that's all that is: Personal choices.
Cheers.
And how is that different from say Adobe using OS-X's software? Same dumb thing. They re-use the things Apple offered to the crowds that have it. This ain't any different.
Palm had their Palm Desktop and Hotsync software to do just that. The only thing I could think of is perhaps Palm realized their own package is such a steaming pile of garbage that their only option was to hitch a ride on iTunes. Perhaps this was a stopgap measure to give Palm enough time to come up with their own full-blown desktop module. It comes to no surprise that Apple is putting the warning out there.
Of course, Pre owners will be the one to complain about Apple if/when that break occurs when they should actually be pointing the finger right back at Palm. Shame on Palm/Rubenstein for even advertising that ability as a feature.
Let's put it this way... Unless Apple breaks support for the iPhone, iPod or whatever Palm latches as; I don't see how Apple can change anything that will break the Pre. Unless Apple is planning to ship new firmware on the oldest iPods ever just to break the device (HELLO Anti-trust)
Speaking for myself, no, I don't.
It's fine with me as an Apple shareholder.
Haha; I'm a shareholder too; and I still think this is a bad idea. Think about it. If you can connect to your fav. music store; it means you wil most likely buy your music from there. So Apple makes money of Pre owners that latch onto iTunes. If iTunes doesn't work with their Pre; Why would they even bother using iTunes in the first place!?
There's been speculation that Palm did this to bait Apple into an anti-trust case and I think today's statement might give them some ammunition. The best play should have been to do nothing.
BINGO. Someone with a thinking brain in here
I agree that it's a piss poor decision on Apple's part to announce this. However in comparison, Microsoft's Zune Marketplace is Zune specific...worse yet after they developed and marketed Played-For-Sure.
Totally agree with ya. But there's a huge difference here. Zune store only works with Zunes. Apple's iTunes only worked with i-products (That's the same shit). The difference here is that a third company could easily masquerade as a Zune and read it's database (no one cares about the Zune marketplace). That would effectively be equivalent. The fact that MS wrote their code to work with their device is the same case as Apple.
Why doesn't Palm just arrange a license deal with Apple? Then, Apple could benefit from the success of their rival. There really is a market big enough, given that the iPhone is exclusive to a single carrier in a given market, for most countries. I know that iTunes isn't really a money maker for Apple, but the more sold, the more profitable it would be on top of the license fees.
I think that heavy handed attempts at keeping iTunes exclusive might bring in some antitrust issues that Apple may not want.
Long story short.. .Palm doesn't need to pay anything to Apple today and can get away with it
I'm an Apple fan as much as the next guy, but I don't understand this. Pre owners are using a free software, and buying Apple's music (most of the time). Besides, why would people buy the Pre over the iPhone? Multiple reasons, many of which are deal breakers for these people. These people could easily use other software and buy their music elsewhere, but they are instead buying it from Apple! If you aren't going to make money off the phone, why turn down the money from the songs?
My two cents.
Another kudo to someone with a brain in here vs zealous Apple rah-rah non-sense. You can still be a fan and have some level of objectivity.
Honestly, it blows me away that a big company would produce a piece of hardware that pretty much relies on someone else's software to do "it's thing".... Palm, catch a clue and have some coffee...!! Apple isn't going to let you use their software. Why should they? They are in competition with Palm and there is no reason to share Itunes as a sync method. What are all of these palm owners going to do when suddenly they can't sync their "pre?" I hope it turns into a class action law suit that gets serious media coverage just for pure entertainment purposes! Stupid PALM!
If you think that the Pre relies on this software; think again. You are severely miss-informed. Unlike the iPhone; the Pre can work as a USB drive.