My understanding is that the Pre takes it a step further by identifying itself as an Apple device, which opens up some functionality that Apple has held close to its vest.
I am fairly certain that it doesn't open up any new functionality, or not much anyway.
I think the reason for doing this is that if Palm did it officially they would have to ask, because it's like an official Apple program to allow, or to not allow devices to use iTunes (and they haven't allowed any new ones for a while.) I think Palm did this so they could say they had compatibility in the press release and so Apple couldn't take it away from them without explicitly doing so in the glare of the public eye.
This gives Apple only two responses. Either they have a hissy fit and disallow the Pre (and Pre mops up with the PR on that and then they allow them anyway), or they say "okay" but let's do it right" and give them a nice icon.
From Palms point of view both these answers are essentially "yes," whereas if they asked first, the answer could easily have been "no."
My understanding is that the Pre takes it a step further by identifying itself as an Apple device, which opens up some functionality that Apple has held close to its vest.
"SIMULATING AN APPLE PRODUCT IS A VIOLATION OF THE SOFTWARE AGREEMENT AND A THEFT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY" (Now how do you suppose?... Not from Jon Rubenstein? That would violate the spirit of his noncompete, and break Steve's heart. Like when Bill Gates heisted the Desktop software from Apple!) Oh, maybe JR signed a "PREnup"!
Jeff Carlson at TidBits pointed out that they're probably trying to trickle stuff out this year so they don't have problems like they did last year with Mobile Me. Too many things shipping at once and so on...
I am fairly certain that it doesn't open up any new functionality, or not much anyway.
I think the reason for doing this is that if Palm did it officially they would have to ask, because it's like an official Apple program to allow, or to not allow devices to use iTunes (and they haven't allowed any new ones for a while.) I think Palm did this so they could say they had compatibility in the press release and so Apple couldn't take it away from them without explicitly doing so in the glare of the public eye.
This gives Apple only two responses. Either they have a hissy fit and disallow the Pre (and Pre mops up with the PR on that and then they allow them anyway), or they say "okay" but let's do it right" and give them a nice icon.
From Palms point of view both these answers are essentially "yes," whereas if they asked first, the answer could easily have been "no."
Well, for instance the Pre will apparently sync with iPhoto, which I do not think is typical of generic devices recognized by iTunes.
That API is older than iTunes itself (comes from SoundJam), and the newest player supported there is older than the first iPod. We know for a fact that the Pre is not using this API, and that Palm are not legitimately syncing, as a Pre displays as an iPod in iTunes.
Well, for instance the Pre will apparently sync with iPhoto, which I do not think is typical of generic devices recognized by iTunes.
My Nokia's sync with iTunes. Is there some big secret that Apple is hiding here by not allowing iTunes to talk to other devices? It seems that this sites Appleista Brigades are all flustered over a non-starter issue. How will the Pre syncing to iTunes affect the "shareholders" here? It is just another device syncing non-DRM'd content. Is this really that important a story? Why hasn't AI mentioned that Apple may charge for redownloading previously purchased game content. Seems to have made it in a few other places than here.... AI only reports good news bias maybe...
... How will the Pre syncing to iTunes affect the "shareholders" here? It is just another device syncing non-DRM'd content. Is this really that important a story? ...
As far as I know Apple created iTunes to sell hardware (iPods and now iPhones), so why should Apple allow
other companies to use part of Apple's ecosystem to sell non Apple hardware?
As far as I know Apple created iTunes to sell hardware (iPods and now iPhones), so why should Apple allow
other companies to use part of Apple's ecosystem to sell non Apple hardware?
Because as iTunes becomes bigger and bigger and takes more Market share, Apple would be in a position to abuse that to eliminate competition. These lessons have already been learned as a result of Microsofts success. We need to put measures in place now to stop Apple from getting to the same point, and cracking open iTunes is a good way of doing this. Unfortunately for Apple, that might mean they sell less hardware, but it's better that way than allowing them to become too big and powerful.
Because as iTunes becomes bigger and bigger and takes more Market share, Apple would be in a position to abuse that to eliminate competition. These lessons have already been learned as a result of Microsofts success. We need to put measures in place now to stop Apple from getting to the same point, and cracking open iTunes is a good way of doing this. Unfortunately for Apple, that might mean they sell less hardware, but it's better that way than allowing them to become too big and powerful.
If Apple can arm twist the RIAA, the MPAA and the independent labels into creating iTunes only exclusive content, we can worry about monopoly. If DRM free iTunes plus content cannot be played on another player, then worry about lock-in.
Comments
My understanding is that the Pre takes it a step further by identifying itself as an Apple device, which opens up some functionality that Apple has held close to its vest.
I am fairly certain that it doesn't open up any new functionality, or not much anyway.
I think the reason for doing this is that if Palm did it officially they would have to ask, because it's like an official Apple program to allow, or to not allow devices to use iTunes (and they haven't allowed any new ones for a while.) I think Palm did this so they could say they had compatibility in the press release and so Apple couldn't take it away from them without explicitly doing so in the glare of the public eye.
This gives Apple only two responses. Either they have a hissy fit and disallow the Pre (and Pre mops up with the PR on that and then they allow them anyway), or they say "okay" but let's do it right" and give them a nice icon.
From Palms point of view both these answers are essentially "yes," whereas if they asked first, the answer could easily have been "no."
My understanding is that the Pre takes it a step further by identifying itself as an Apple device, which opens up some functionality that Apple has held close to its vest.
"SIMULATING AN APPLE PRODUCT IS A VIOLATION OF THE SOFTWARE AGREEMENT AND A THEFT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY" (Now how do you suppose?... Not from Jon Rubenstein? That would violate the spirit of his noncompete, and break Steve's heart. Like when Bill Gates heisted the Desktop software from Apple!) Oh, maybe JR signed a "PREnup"!
Shipped no. Announced yes.
Jeff Carlson at TidBits pointed out that they're probably trying to trickle stuff out this year so they don't have problems like they did last year with Mobile Me. Too many things shipping at once and so on...
I am fairly certain that it doesn't open up any new functionality, or not much anyway.
I think the reason for doing this is that if Palm did it officially they would have to ask, because it's like an official Apple program to allow, or to not allow devices to use iTunes (and they haven't allowed any new ones for a while.) I think Palm did this so they could say they had compatibility in the press release and so Apple couldn't take it away from them without explicitly doing so in the glare of the public eye.
This gives Apple only two responses. Either they have a hissy fit and disallow the Pre (and Pre mops up with the PR on that and then they allow them anyway), or they say "okay" but let's do it right" and give them a nice icon.
From Palms point of view both these answers are essentially "yes," whereas if they asked first, the answer could easily have been "no."
Well, for instance the Pre will apparently sync with iPhoto, which I do not think is typical of generic devices recognized by iTunes.
Stopping pre from syncing with iTunes would be a bad move unless they kick it [ pre ] in its ass with their OS 3.0 release.
Palm can build their own Audio/Video sync software backend.
Palm can build their own Audio/Video sync software backend.
Actually they can use iTunes and all they should need to do this is available from Apple (since 2002 I think).
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2172
Shipped no. Announced yes.
iPhone 3.0 will more than likely be released however...
Actually they can use iTunes and all they should need to do this is available from Apple (since 2002 I think).
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2172
That API is older than iTunes itself (comes from SoundJam), and the newest player supported there is older than the first iPod. We know for a fact that the Pre is not using this API, and that Palm are not legitimately syncing, as a Pre displays as an iPod in iTunes.
My understanding is that the Pre takes it a step further by identifying itself as an Apple device
My understanding is a bunch of people are talking out their a$$ and speculating about an unreleased product.
Can we at least let the Pre ship and see what Apple does or doesn't do before casting them as the Great Satan?
I know it's not the fun thing to do, but it is the reasonable approach to take.
My understanding is a bunch of people are talking out their a$$ and speculating about an unreleased product.
Can we at least let the Pre ship and see what Apple does or doesn't do before casting them as the Great Satan?
I know it's not the fun thing to do, but it is the reasonable approach to take.
As linked to in another thread, Gruber has some pretty specific observations regarding how the Pre is talking to iTunes.
Sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Well, for instance the Pre will apparently sync with iPhoto, which I do not think is typical of generic devices recognized by iTunes.
My Nokia's sync with iTunes. Is there some big secret that Apple is hiding here by not allowing iTunes to talk to other devices? It seems that this sites Appleista Brigades are all flustered over a non-starter issue. How will the Pre syncing to iTunes affect the "shareholders" here? It is just another device syncing non-DRM'd content. Is this really that important a story? Why hasn't AI mentioned that Apple may charge for redownloading previously purchased game content. Seems to have made it in a few other places than here.... AI only reports good news bias maybe...
My Nokia's sync with iTunes.
No, they don't ? they sync with a third-party app that accesses an XML export of the iTunes library. Blackberries work the same.
It is just another device syncing non-DRM'd content.
No, it's a device pretending to be an iPod in order to sync the exact way iPods do.
... How will the Pre syncing to iTunes affect the "shareholders" here? It is just another device syncing non-DRM'd content. Is this really that important a story? ...
As far as I know Apple created iTunes to sell hardware (iPods and now iPhones), so why should Apple allow
other companies to use part of Apple's ecosystem to sell non Apple hardware?
As far as I know Apple created iTunes to sell hardware (iPods and now iPhones), so why should Apple allow
other companies to use part of Apple's ecosystem to sell non Apple hardware?
Because as iTunes becomes bigger and bigger and takes more Market share, Apple would be in a position to abuse that to eliminate competition. These lessons have already been learned as a result of Microsofts success. We need to put measures in place now to stop Apple from getting to the same point, and cracking open iTunes is a good way of doing this. Unfortunately for Apple, that might mean they sell less hardware, but it's better that way than allowing them to become too big and powerful.
Because as iTunes becomes bigger and bigger and takes more Market share, Apple would be in a position to abuse that to eliminate competition. These lessons have already been learned as a result of Microsofts success. We need to put measures in place now to stop Apple from getting to the same point, and cracking open iTunes is a good way of doing this. Unfortunately for Apple, that might mean they sell less hardware, but it's better that way than allowing them to become too big and powerful.
If Apple can arm twist the RIAA, the MPAA and the independent labels into creating iTunes only exclusive content, we can worry about monopoly. If DRM free iTunes plus content cannot be played on another player, then worry about lock-in.
Apple has grown to be the biggest distributor in the USA, but I think they are far from a monopoly.
No, they don't ? they sync with a third-party app that accesses an XML export of the iTunes library. Blackberries work the same.
No, it's a device pretending to be an iPod in order to sync the exact way iPods do.
And this is bad why?
As far as I know Apple created iTunes to sell hardware (iPods and now iPhones), so why should Apple allow
other companies to use part of Apple's ecosystem to sell non Apple hardware?
I never ceases to amaze me at how Appleistas continue to think that everyone wants and iPod or iPhone.
How the fook did this turn into a conversation about the Pre?
No kidding....