Palm Pre syncs with iTunes on a Mac just like an iPhone

12346

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 124
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macnerd93 View Post


    you don't have to be so rude, I'm correct supporting other devices would make iTunes bad. I don't think you understood my comment. I'll try it again in simple terms



    Why would Apple want to support the Palm Pre?, it would be taking sales away from there product the iPhone. I was saying if iTunes did start to support other devices it would be swamped with problems, just like Microsoft windows running on so much different types of hardware, thats what causes the problems



    Not trying to be rude- sorry. Ok we have iTunes running on windows now everywhere. Apple put it out there to pentrate and get switchers. Now the if the Pre is simply running it as well then they are simply beating Apple at their own game. Why should it be blocked simply becuase it's a small windows device??
  • Reply 102 of 124
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    Not trying to be rude- sorry. Ok we have iTunes running on windows now everywhere. Apple put it out there to pentrate and get switchers. Now the if the Pre is simply running it as well then they are simply beating Apple at their own game. Why should it be blocked simply becuase it's a small windows device??



    because apple intended it for iPods, not other companies, cos then they are just allowing there competition to use there software
  • Reply 103 of 124
    ulfoafulfoaf Posts: 175member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NPrtmn4evr View Post


    But there's also a reason why Apple doesn't want OS X on PCs. They create excellent software to sell the hardware. By allowing others to access their software, they diminish their hardware market.



    While opening up iTunes is a good idea for the CONSUMER, it is not in Apple's best interest to do so.



    Also, by allowing other hardware to use iTunes, would Apple also have to provide support for non-Apple devices and make sure everything is compatible? Apple wants the user's experience to be as flawless as possible, by opening iTunes up to other hardware options they lose a lot of that control. If a user complains that iTunes isn't working perfectly with their Pre, it could be Apple that gets the bad press.



    As I said, this is a tradeoff. We see no signs yet that Apple is officially supporting this. They of course will support customers who buy the iTunes songs to go on their Macs or PCs, but will they support problems syncing or playing on the Pre? No, I don't think so. That will be Palm's responsibility. Of course, someone can use iTunes just to manage their music without buying it.



    Personally, the ease of using iTunes is so addictive that I quickly quit buying music from other sources. I think once people use it for syncing to a Pre, they will start buying from iTunes. This is not as good for Apple as someone buying an iPhone and filling it with iTunes music, but it is much better than no iTunes music.



    If this fails and it is a bad experience for the Pre users, Apple has not spent a dime! If they buy iTunes songs for their Pre, definitely a win for Apple.



    I wouldn't consider it reasonable to blame Apple for something they never said would work, but of course that would not stop a lot of people for blaming Pre problems on them.
  • Reply 104 of 124
    ulfoafulfoaf Posts: 175member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macnerd93 View Post


    oh okay, well it would be okay supporting one device, but you know whats coming. After one everyone is going to want to be able to do it.



    After reading more today, it sounds like the Pre is fooling iTunes into thinking it is an iPod with hardware "signatures", and Apple has gone to some lengths to make sure iTunes only recognizes iPod/iPhone hardware. Apple can easily kill this anytime they want, I'm sure. I'm curious to see if they do. They are certainly under no obligation to support this, that would fall on Palm. This is a bad move on Palm's part since they have NO control over what is likely their biggest competitor's software. I think the more successful the Pre is, the less likely this will be allowed by Apple. Selling iTunes songs is better than selling nothing, but if they feel their are enabling their main competitor, they will cut it off at the knees. Pre is tempting them with iTunes sales!
  • Reply 105 of 124
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macnerd93 View Post


    Why would Apple want to support the Palm Pre?, it would be taking sales away from there product the iPhone. I was saying if iTunes did start to support other devices it would be swamped with problems, just like Microsoft windows running on so much different types of hardware, thats what causes the problems



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macnerd93 View Post


    because apple intended it for iPods, not other companies, cos then they are just allowing there competition to use there software



    As discussed previously in the thread, Apple has an SDK to allow other PMPs to use the iTunes library and even have the device show up in iTunes. As you?ve mentioned, this effort to not only allow other devices to use iTunes, but to also financially support an SDK to help them connect to iTunes is not a good financial move? if that is the only criteria you look at to make a decision. I speculate that Apple, with their legal iPod monopoly which is tied to the iTunes app may be a legal concern at some point. So far, I know of no lawsuits stating that Apple has obtained their monopoly or is abusing heir monopoly position. This inclusion, while pottentially costing them a few HW sales, may be a preventive measure to ensure that they can maintain their PMP monopoly position.



    However, the Palm Pre is not simply a PMP and the iPhone, the market it competes with most directly, does not hold a monopoly on smartphones so Apple presumably could say no to it since it is a different class of device. I checked the compatible player list, there are no phones in the list. (The above info is speculative)
  • Reply 106 of 124
    mrochestermrochester Posts: 693member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post


    You still do not get it, it is like buying tires that work on one car, yes they work and run well, but they do not fit on any other car but yours.



    Of course apple could limit this access, but most likely they will not, since other plug-ins allow you to do the same thing for other players. What Apple offers that no one else does right now is a total seamless integration of their technology, It just works and other companies can make other elements of their technology work, but not as well as Apple.



    I highly double palm is backing anyone into any corners.



    Whilst that's great, you do realise that you are promoting and endorsing the concept of a company keeping a very tight reign on their products, which in turn stifles competition and pushes up prices? If that sounds a lot like Microsoft and Windows, then you'd be right! We should be encouraging companies like Palm to chip away at Apple's dangerously monopolistic practices to send the message to them that locked down products and services are not cool! I don't think it'll be too long before anti-competition bodies step in to force Apple to open up various products and services to prevent them from becoming a large monopoly.
  • Reply 107 of 124
    brucepbrucep Posts: 2,823member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    This isn't my opinion. Do your research. See what that Gruber lark has to say on the matter. Others too. When Apple says they don't make much money from iTunes, they are lying.



    Well you say what you say . Would you have a link ?. As far as i know apple has to sell alot more to make money. but if they do make money good for them .



    peace



    9
  • Reply 108 of 124
    irelandireland Posts: 17,749member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by brucep View Post


    Well you say what you say . Would you have a link ?. As far as i know apple has to sell alot more to make money. but if they do make money good for them.



    Whether it's good for them or not good that's not the point I was originally making. The point is if someone is going to buy an iPod they'll buy one, but if they don't by Apple making an iTunes API they can tie other makers into iTunes, give others the "iTunes-experience", and sell them movies, TV Shows and Music, and make money from them, while they are at it. Showing them how easy it can be, could even sell them an iPod in the future.



    Here's ONE of the pieces I was talking about.
  • Reply 109 of 124
    cbw87cbw87 Posts: 36member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    Showing them how easy it can be, could even sell them an iPod in the future.



    I disagree; if they can have it as easy as iTunes with a competitor's device, why bother buying an iPod or iPhone? iTunes is "part of the package" when buying an iPod; a selling point, and Apple are entitled to keep it like that.



    It's not analogous to Microsoft refusing to e.g. support iPods on Windows; the onus there was on Apple and they came up with their own app to do it. Similarly, Apple won't ban the Pre from OS X, but it's perfectly entitled not to allow the Pre to piggyback on its iTunes app for free.



    There's very little difference, in a broad sense, between what Palm's doing and what those installing OS X onto hackintoshes do. Apple is a hardware company, the software sells the hardware, therefore Apple is entitled to break the Pre's compatibility to protect its software exclusivity and hence its hardware sales, end of story. Whether it will or not, is a different matter.
  • Reply 110 of 124
    mrochestermrochester Posts: 693member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macnerd93 View Post


    you don't have to be so rude, I'm correct supporting other devices would make iTunes bad. I don't think you understood my comment. I'll try it again in simple terms



    Why would Apple want to support the Palm Pre?, it would be taking sales away from there product the iPhone. I was saying if iTunes did start to support other devices it would be swamped with problems, just like Microsoft windows running on so much different types of hardware, thats what causes the problems



    It's funny you've said that as if it were a bad thing, because that's exactly what makes Windows so great - the freedom and flexibility to chose whatever hardware and spec you like. If you do a bit of research before buying, you can get an idea of the compatibility and stability of different components so that you end up with a computer that works flawlessly.



    Apple probably doesn't want to support the Palm Pre, but they will certainly get a lot of bad press by actively seeking to prevent it from working with iTunes. If Apple are the great software house that a lot of people around here seem to think, I can't see what the problem is for them to undertake supporting any device on iTunes - apparently they are far superior at doing this than Microsoft, so why don't they put their money where their mouth is, and do it?
  • Reply 111 of 124
    irelandireland Posts: 17,749member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cbw87 View Post


    I disagree; if they can have it as easy as iTunes with a competitor's device, why bother buying an iPod or iPhone?



    Because the iPod is also very good. They can have the iTunes-experience, but there's only one way to get the iPod experience. They just need to continue to make the best players. Who cares about Zunes or MS, let's leave them out of at least one of the threads here - please...
  • Reply 112 of 124
    cbw87cbw87 Posts: 36member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    Because the iPod is also very good. They can have the iTunes-experience, but there's only one way to get the iPod experience. They just need to continue to make the best players. Who cares about Zunes or MS, let's leave them out of at least one of the threads here - please...



    I think you miss the point. A Pre sale is a lost iPhone sale. iTunes on the Pre removes one reason to buy the iPhone. Therefore it provides absolutely no advantage to Apple, except the negligent money they make make from iTunes purchases, which we have no clear info on, and which itself is unlikely since they may as well go to Amazon or elsewhere.



    The only advantage would be for Pre users to see the awesomeness of the App Store and get jealous. But does it even show up in the store if you don't have an iPhone?
  • Reply 113 of 124
    irelandireland Posts: 17,749member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cbw87 View Post


    I think you miss the point. A Pre sale is a lost iPhone sale. iTunes on the Pre removes one reason to buy the iPhone. Therefore it provides absolutely no advantage to Apple, except the negligent money they make make from iTunes purchases, which we have no clear info on, and which itself is unlikely since they may as well go to Amazon or elsewhere.



    You cannot setup the argument to make a "therefore it provides absolutely no advantage to Apple", and completely discount my viewpoint. We have different opinions on the matter, I respectfully disagree with yours. I can see the point you're making, but I think you're wrong. I don't think the situation is as black and white as I suspect you think it is. Most people already know which device they want, a lost sale wouldn't be because of iTunes, but more so for the device itself. Ask people, I've tried this. They don't take the syncing software "too-much" into account at all really when asked. The point I'm making is Apple still can have a hold on someone they lose a sale to, sell them content and perhaps sell them some hardware in the future if they happen to see something that takes their fancy. And like I said, it stops the iTunes competition even getting a chance, before it does. And sooner or later some competition law will come into play, and Apple will be forced to do something anyway, as iTunes is the king. Apple owns iTunes, they can do what they want, but when someone gets too big it's not quite that simple. It's good karma for Apple. This karma that Steve "seems" to say is important.
  • Reply 114 of 124
    mrochestermrochester Posts: 693member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    You cannot setup the argument to make a "therefore it provides absolutely no advantage to Apple", and completely discount my viewpoint. We have different opinions on the matter, I respectfully disagree with yours. I can see the point your making, but I think you're wrong. I don't think the situation is as black and white as I suspect you think it is. Most people already know which device they want, a lost sale wouldn't be because of iTunes, but more so for the device itself. Ask people, I've tried this. They don't take the syncing software "too-much" into account at all really when asked. The point I'm making is Apple still can have a hold on someone they lose a sale to, sell them content and perhaps sell them some hardware in the future if they happen to see something that takes their fancy. And like I said, it stops the iTunes competition even getting a chance, before it does. And sooner or later some competition law will come into play, and Apple will be forced to do something anyway, as iTunes is the king. Apple owns iTunes, they can do what they want, but when someone gets too big it's not quite that simple. It's good karma for Apple. This karma that Steve "seems" to say is important.



    I agree with you Ireland. Apple are better off selling SOME music and content to other phone users rather than selling them nothing at all. As Apple and iTunes gets bigger and bigger, I believe they'll either have to go this way voluntarily, or they will be forced to by law, Microsoft style.
  • Reply 115 of 124
    cbw87cbw87 Posts: 36member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    You cannot setup the argument to ...



    Sorry, I'll make a better attempt to understand/find common ground.



    I see your point thus far: that buyers having some investment in the Apple ecosystem is better than having none, right? So it's better that a Pre buyer who was intending to buy the Pre [whether it synced with iTunes or not] uses iTunes to sync, thereby retaining some connection with Apple.



    I agree with that, so far as it goes, I just don't think it goes very far. It's helpful insofar as Apple makes a profit on its iTunes sales. It's helpful insofar as there's a possible cross-sell back to Apple devices. But like you said, that would be solely on the strength of the individual device, iTunes would have no impact, not least because it was now 'open' to other devices.



    My point was solely that if Apple wants to leverage the hard work it has put into iTunes (I can't imagine that iTunes makes any profit after software development costs, customer service costs, transaction and hosting costs plus content licensing, but Gruber seems to disagree), including the easy one-stop sync, to function as a differentiating factor for the iPhone, it is perfectly entitled to do so.



    I would agree with the competition law argument if Apple was still selling DRM'd music. It would certainly be shoddy practice to "lock-in" users to the iPod ecosystem by not letting them take their music elsewhere. Obviously this still applies to individuals' iTunes back catalogues, but not so much going forward. Otherwise, I think the argument is misconceived. There are alternative music stores, iTunes has no monopoly. The same music is available for purchase elsewhere.



    Just because iTunes syncs well, why should Apple be obliged to allow other vendors to access it? Analogies are always dodgy, and this one isn't exact, but wouldn't that be similar to arguing that Apple is under an obligation to make FCP available on Windows hardware, or that Microsoft is obligated to make Office for Mac? Alternatively, why can't I use my iPod with Zune marketplace? Should Microsoft be obliged to allow me to do that, because they provide the best subscription music model, and have a monopoly on that?



    We need to make sure we're not arguing for different things; whether Apple is obligated to allow the Pre access is certainly a different question from whether it ought to do so, or whether it is desirable that it does so.



    From my personal opinion as an iPhone user, the iTunes integration makes the Pre a hell of a lot more attractive to me as my next smartphone choice, not because of any financial investment in iTunes (I have none), but simply for the ease of not having to transfer out my library to another app, and simplicity. I had no attraction to the Pre before this, for this particular reason - Palm really solved a problem for me. It is this sort of effect of iTunes sync on customers that Apple may wish to avoid.



    They're between a rock and a hard place though, Palm have been clever. They either lose, or they're the big bad wolf.
  • Reply 116 of 124
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Deleted
  • Reply 117 of 124
    irelandireland Posts: 17,749member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Deleted



    What was deleted? I disagree with your methods
  • Reply 118 of 124
    irelandireland Posts: 17,749member
    It's certainly an interesting thread, I'll say that much.



    iTunes do not have a monopoly, in the strict definition of the word, but neither does Microsoft have a monopoly with Windows. Yet Microsoft have been forced to do stuff, and make software changes etc. iTunes is not a monopoly, but it's not an island either. Opening it up doesn't just keep it at number one, but more fundamentally the move could make it the de facto standard for 'a lot of companies' for a very long time. I guess it's about the bigger picture for me, and the future of the Living room from an iTunes perspective too.



    For whatever reason it seems to feel like the right thing to do to me, right in many different ways and on several different levels. Yeah, for me it's about the bigger picture, beyond the horizon.
  • Reply 119 of 124
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    It's certainly an interesting thread, I'll say that much.



    iTunes do not have a monopoly, in the strict definition of the word, but neither does Microsoft have a monopoly with Windows. Yet Microsoft have been forced to do stuff, and make software changes etc. iTunes is not a monopoly, but it's not an island either. Opening it up doesn't just keep it at number one, but more fundamentally the move could make it the de facto standard for 'a lot of companies' for a very long time. I guess it's about the bigger picture for me, and the future of the Living room from an iTunes perspective too.



    For whatever reason it seems to feel like the right thing to do to me, right in many different ways and on several different levels. Yeah, for me it's about the bigger picture, beyond the horizon.



    I think the speculation boils down to two basic points…
    — I could see some people regard the iPod dominance, and by extension Tunes, an antitrust situation if Apple were to disallow 3rd-parties to connect to iTunes to manage their music.
    However…
    — The iTunes library has already been freely accessible in the OS so any 3rd-party app or 3rd-party device could easily catalogue the files/folders completely bypassing iTunes anyway. Even the iTunes library XML files cold be easily parsed while completely ignoring the iTunes app, so it may just be the lesser of two evils in that there is still an Apple product in the mix when they use iTunes.
    Regardless, I think that Apple will keep Palm Pre access.
  • Reply 120 of 124
    chronsterchronster Posts: 1,894member
    I think they'll keep the access also. People don't buy their phones for itunes, they buy the phones for much more substantial features than that. For Apple to block Pre owners from iTunes would mean they were forcing those Pre owners to use something different than iTunes, and at that point if Apple hasn't persuaded them to buy an iPhone, blocking them would be even more damaging to their profits.
Sign In or Register to comment.