Updates the Now Network to the iPhone Network. Edge, 3G, 4G International GSM bands so all versions of all iPhones can work here in the states. So if you purchased your iPhone in Europe and travel to America, your covered! A cellular carrier dedicated to one theme, the iPhone, iPod Touch, Tablet, Laptops, also helps eliminating bottlenecks, dropped calls, lost voice mails etc. on other networks that have multiple company product lines for limited bandwidth.
Ties MobileMe into the iPhone Network. Apple creates any necessary apps that allow users to view what they created on their Mac, uploaded to MobileMe, and have available at anytime for the iPhone and other Apple related products (tablet, iPod Touch, Laptops).
Ends exclusivity agreement and contract in total with AT&T. Offers one time rebate of iPhone users on AT&T, jailbroken phones, hacked phones and of course, owners of Pre...
i love apple currently have a imac g4 24 inch (intel based),
Really? Intel made PPC G4 chips for Motorola? I did not know that.
Quote:
I dont see why apple wont let the palm pre sync with them if its not even harmful to them in any way.
Apple wrote the software (iTunes). Palm could very easily write their own software to sync if they wanted. Nokia has already done it with Nokia Multimedia Transfer.
* ITunes does not sell hardware! For any one user of an ipod there are three potential users that would buy ipods if they could use it without the stupid ITunes requirement! Just let it work as a USB mass storage device. And, lots and lots of users complain about ITunes. I think ITunes works fine but that should be up to anyone.
I never said 'iTunes sells hardware'. That would be ludicrous - "..why yes I bought my PC from Windows..." Please read my response carefully before commenting. You can use the iPod as a mass storage device. It is called Disk Mode. Look it up.
I looked at them and chose to use iTunes to manage my iPod as I felt it was best.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero
* Apple is making money selling music, a simple fact you can check in the quarterly reports. So the argument to only sell music from Itunes store to ipod/apple/iphone owners is discriminating and anti-competetive. You wait and se what the courts in EU will say. And the issue is about size, this apply to any shop/system once they get a large market share. What if amazon only would sell to hispanics?
I never said that Apple doesn't make some money selling music. I implied that it was not their primary focus. There is a difference! "So the argument to only sell music from Itunes store to ipod/apple/iphone owners is discriminating and anti-competetive" Do you even know what you are saying? There is nothing anti competitive here. If you bought music on Amazon it will work fine on your iPod. There are other e-stores as well. You can bring music (CD etc) into iTunes from many sources. Or even into other iPod software alternatives. Please explain to me where the anticompetitiveness is?? "What if amazon only would sell to hispanics?" What are you talking about? Where the heck do hispanics come into this discussion? I do not live anywhere near North, South or Central America. Please keep to the subject at hand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero
* Apple does not own my media, (nor adresses, calendar events etc) that I have in my ITunes library! If I previously used ipods and was forced to use ITunes then it is my property and I can make use of it ANY WAY I WANT.
Good for you. You can use your iPod to do anything you want. Paperweight, ship anchor - I don't care, and neither does Apple. Once again, no one is tying you to a table and forcing you to use iTunes, iPods or anything else for that matter. Perhaps you would be better off with a Zune. Or a Pre. Whatever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero
Conclusively, Apple's mobile venture is much about lock in and it is an UGLY path of keeping customer in the "hog hen" once hooked. In contrast, Apple's computer venture used to be about freedom, remembering the 1984 Mac video (most of you here do not remember that?) about how we should not be controlled and brain washed. Now it is Apple creating a IPhone App Censorship-Nanny-state!
Conclusively? Wrong adverb my friend. Lock in is a very emotive term. A lot like Nanny State. Once again, please keep to the subject at hand and try to use terms that are contextually appropriate. if you want a mobile with data, in most countries you have to have a data contact for a period of time. Facts of life, mate. If you don't want a contract then get an iPod touch. Apples computer venture is about making products (not just computers!) that people want to use. It is also about making money. How do you justify using another companies product (iTunes) on your product without any recompense towards Apples R & D? Isn't that theft? Are you going to pay for these costs with your colossal sense of entitlement? I don't think so.
How about Palm create their own software solution? They certainly have the freedom to do that.
*sigh* Look mate, I have no intention of engaging in a war of words with you.
If you want to use an iPod, great. Use whatever software you want.
I'm going to get offline for a while and smell some air that has not previously been through my laptop. Later.
That's the problem with non-Americans. They don't understand the concept of "Right to bear arms" to defend and protect yourself. Originally this was put in to ensure American citizens had the right to defend their homeland from foreign aggressors such as Britain. Unfortunately, today it now means the right to defend your home, property and livelihood because of criminal scum that want to steal, rape, and kill your family and children.
I am glad I am allowed to own a weapon and protect my family. Gun safety is TAUGHT in my household.
Read up on the citizens of this country that saved lives by being allowed to have a concealed carry permit, or saved their families and prevented further tragedy from criminal minds.
Liberals and anti-gun twinkie loving countries can kiss my a$$. Oh, and so can PALM. They are rotting. This recent dilution is a smokescreen for their inevitable demise (demise = being bought by MSFT)
I didn't pore over everyone's comments; just wanted to add my two cents. I do know of two people who are ecstatic with their Pres, good for them. That said, PALM is unlikely to last much longer. It is deep in the hole, has had to go for a second or third round of funding; anyone lucky enough to have bought PALM as the bottom of the market should get out now. Once iPhone hits other carriers, the Pre will be toast, Apple's repeated disabling of iTunes will be be enough for the first-gen of Pre owners to discourage others. Pre will be an RIP in two years, Motorola in 3 and RIMM in four
What if I said "Exactly. People supporting Apple in this are acting like 1) the Mac has a right to the same consideration on the Microsoft platform / software as a PC does; and 2) that this would be good for Microsoft."
So should MS be allowed to block iTunes in PC's? Really? Should Windows automatically delete Safari? This is a dangerous argument you are making.
Apple doesn't delete Palm desktop sync or a million other programs that COMPANIES WRITE FOR THEMSELVES. As far as I know, there are thousands of third-party programs (many of them from hardware vendors) that you can freely download and install FROM APPLE'S OWN OS X DOWNLOAD page. See how easy Apple makes that. Apple are way more open in this regard, puhlease. And Apple don't cripple any of these just because they can. Mac fans like myself use many of these third-party titles in preference to Apple's own equivalent software. The competition is encouraged.
There is evidence that iTunes and Safari are a more little restricted than they should be on Windows.
Regardless, MS sure does limit what third-party software can do. Can iTunes and WMV interoperate fully in every way? Can you use iTunes to do everything that you want to with your Zune? What ever happened to Plays For Sure and all of MS' partners? I am sure they are real fans of MS right now. MS stabbed them in the back and went for a Zune only solution. MS would love to delete or restrict a lot more than they currently do, but they have been sued five ways till Tuesday over the years. Restricting and deleting and corrupting is MS SOP.
The OS is a platform on which you are supposed to be allowed to run third-party software using the open standards it supports (there are more of these on Mac OS X). Third parties are supposed to write programs using these open standards and the public APIs supplied by the OS owner. That doesn't mean you automatically get a free pass to hack into core services or piggy-back on someone else's software.
Think about this: what if iTunes was not created by Apple, who also happen to have created the OS as well? What if Creative or someone wrote iTunes? Would we even be having this discussion? Creative would make it sync seamlessly with their players. If someone else like Palm mooched off their software, you can bet there would be issues. If HP or Epson wrote superior scanning or printing software, should the other company whine that the software doesn't run their printers and scanners just as seamlessly. I just don't get it! Be careful what you are arguing here, because pretty soon no-one will want to put any effort into writing good software -- they will be forced to let the competition use it as their own.
You argument about Apple being anti-competitive is probably from emotional standpoint, since how can a company be anti-competitive, if you have a choice.
If you know something about law you would see this is a very ignorant comment. There are a number of ways you can be anti-competetive according to law and still offer (some) freedom to customers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul
Now you want EU to basically tell Apple:
You MUST offer sync ability to other electronic devices, ever though YOU have a choice not use Apple's apps and hardware.
I never said that! The part of using anti-competitive practices, is about not making *extra efforts* to block competition, which is the case here. Palm made an effort, small but still, made the effort, to let consumers use their music etc, which users rightfully own after spending money i ITunes Store. To block this is by part of the definition anti-competetive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul
YOU understood the consumer model, Apple was offering you when you bought the music from their store and now, you want to change their model, since it does not suit your requirements. Then go to another music store online and make a choice!
Yes, **I** did understand! This is not about me but about the average consumer. I know I can hack the ITunes library if I want and export all contents. I also only own IPhone so there is no need. I would never buy a Pre. This is not about Pre. It is about freedom and anti-competetive practices.
But, this is the key thing, when the average consumer "buys" music from ITunes then he/she is not "buying" in the generally accepted meaning of the word. The property rights are greatly diminished due to the low utility implemented by Apple thinking in the long term. A lot of consumers are not informed of this. As a side note, the EULA is over 100 pages long and completely invalid nonsense under many EU-countries law. This could only have been written by ignorant US lawyers.
Yes it's obvious that iTunes is a monopoly, there's no way that another piece of software could be more prevalent. take Windows Media Player, it's got nowhere near the market pene...
..oh, hang on.
The Palm pre has no respect for USB standards so why should Apple?
If Apple wanted to run 110 volts down USB to a spoofed iPod why should anyone stop them.
The USB-IF guidelines are obviously meaningless to Palm, why should they care?
btw your contacts, calendar etc are synced with the pre-existing software on your computer, iTunes even gives you a choice of which one to use.
you don't need iTunes to sync that information to another device.
Just a thought: Since my iPhone 3G has ongoing issues syncing with the iTunes 64-bit version for Vista (which Apple still as not corrected as of yet), and results in (but not limited to) corrupted album artwork, songs skipping, and software updates freezing, maybe owning the Palm Pre to sync with iTunes wouldn't be so bad...
Apple is entitled to protect it's software from devices spoofing USB Identities to gain access, in the same way a bank is entitled to prevent someone from gaining access to an ATM by spoofing someone else's card ID.
This is not "blocking competition" it is stopping fraudulent (i.e. obtaining a benefit by deception) activity by Palm.
Access to purchased songs is not blocked by using legitimate means i.e. writing software to interface with your device and iTunes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero
I never said that! The part of using anti-competitive practices, is about not making *extra efforts* to block competition, which is the case here. Palm made an effort, small but still, made the effort, to let consumers use their music etc, which users rightfully own after spending money i ITunes Store. To block this is by part of the definition anti-competetive.
It's not about "hacking" the iTunes library, many companies write software to use iTunes with their devices e.g. Nokia, Blackberry, Motorola etc
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero
Yes, **I** did understand! This is not about me but about the average consumer. I know I can hack the ITunes library if I want and export all contents. I also only own IPhone so there is no need. I would never buy a Pre. This is not about Pre. It is about freedom and anti-competetive practices.
iTunes is acting as an agent in order to sell material WHERE THE COPYRIGHTS ARE HELD BY OTHERS, as such they have to respect the legal requirements of the copyright holders.
If you think the EU has a different, more open approach to this, I suggest you look into The Pirate Bay, and what is happening to the owners in the courts of Sweden.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankzero
But, this is the key thing, when the average consumer "buys" music from ITunes then he/she is not "buying" in the generally accepted meaning of the word. The property rights are greatly diminished due to the low utility implemented by Apple thinking in the long term. A lot of consumers are not informed of this. As a side note, the EULA is over 100 pages long and completely invalid nonsense under many EU-countries law. This could only have been written by ignorant US lawyers.
Illegal? Name the country. The USB-F publishes standards and allows companies to use their logo. If they don't want Palm to use their logo, they can send them a letter and Palm will stop. BFD.
Think about it, if an observant consumer looks at the packaging, they may not see that it is USB compatible. "How does this connect to my computer?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homie
They are not a government. They do not have any authority. Their opinion is somewhat important and I am disappointed in their stance but that does not mean Palm is doing something "illegal."
They are in violation of the contract they signed to become a member of the USB Consortium. Violations of contractual law is still very much illegal. I'm no expert, but could this also be a violation of the DCMA?
The big question is what is the USB Consortium going to do? This is the first time someone has spoofed another company's assigned ID that I've ever heard of. What's the precident? How to proceed?
Playing the David vs Goliath won't work for Palm on this issue, which is why their argument before the USB-IF failed miserably.
Palm is toast. If you have any stock in it, sell it now.
This whole battle seems like a losing proposition for Palm. Imagine if you bought an iphone and every week or couple of weeks it stopped syncing with your media. Eventually it gets fixed, but sooner or later it stops syncing again. This happens over and over. Regardless of who is right and who is wrong, eventually, I'd get tired of this and look for alternate solutions. Even if palm re-enables sync every time, I'd still be pissed if I was a pre user and couldn't get new media onto my phone for a few days or a few weeks every time itunes blocked it. Maybe I"d find some kind of third party software, like the missing sync, or maybe I would go for a new phone. If I went for a new phone, I doubt I'd get the new pre (whatever it was at the time I upgraded), as I know that this hassle is going to continue.
If you won't update iTunes every time new version releases you are fine with Pre.
Rightly so, and thus It was not a quote. Nevertheless, you said 'Apple isn't in the iTunes business to sell music, they are there to sell hardware and the software...' which i was alluding to.
I still claim freeing ipods from ITunes would sell more ipods! And, freeing ITunes from ipods would sell more music! I do not understand that you all, "Palm-bashers", cannot see that whatever Apple argues, it is illegal (anti-trust law) to sell one using the freeness of the other. A very known case of this is the Netscape / IE battle with tie-in to Windows. Remember?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostkiwi
"So the argument to only sell music from Itunes store to ipod/apple/iphone owners is discriminating and anti-competetive" Do you even know what you are saying? There is nothing anti competitive here. If you bought music on Amazon it will work fine on your iPod. There are other e-stores as well.
Sorry, I put the "only" in the wrong place. The intended meaning was "sell music from Itunes store *only to* ipod/iphones". I know you can buy CDs etc and use with ipods. That is all good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostkiwi
How do you justify using another companies product (iTunes) on your product without any recompense towards Apples R & D? Isn't that theft? Are you going to pay for these costs with your colossal sense of entitlement? I don't think so.
How about Palm create their own software solution? They certainly have the freedom to do that.
Firstly, as I stated above, you are not allowed to give away things free under any terms. Thus if Apple, unlawfully does this then this "recompense" problem is about charging (more than free) for ITunes and balancing with charging less for hardware/music. When it comes to Apple's income, it is also very hard to argue they will earn less returns of ITunes efforts, by excluding potential customers from the store.
About hispanics, I do not care where you live. The hypothetical case was just a general example that should make the absurdity clear of selecting customers to block to any store when there is no extra effort to let them in!
I agree the censorship issue, relating to App Store arbitrary rejection powers, is off topic but it fits right in with Apple's unproportionate control behaviour. Again, check the "why 1984"-video and you will know a different Apple! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8
Comments
Gets rid of Pre... and others
Updates the Now Network to the iPhone Network. Edge, 3G, 4G International GSM bands so all versions of all iPhones can work here in the states. So if you purchased your iPhone in Europe and travel to America, your covered! A cellular carrier dedicated to one theme, the iPhone, iPod Touch, Tablet, Laptops, also helps eliminating bottlenecks, dropped calls, lost voice mails etc. on other networks that have multiple company product lines for limited bandwidth.
Ties MobileMe into the iPhone Network. Apple creates any necessary apps that allow users to view what they created on their Mac, uploaded to MobileMe, and have available at anytime for the iPhone and other Apple related products (tablet, iPod Touch, Laptops).
Ends exclusivity agreement and contract in total with AT&T. Offers one time rebate of iPhone users on AT&T, jailbroken phones, hacked phones and of course, owners of Pre...
No more ITMS hacking by Palm...
i love apple currently have a imac g4 24 inch (intel based),
Really? Intel made PPC G4 chips for Motorola? I did not know that.
I dont see why apple wont let the palm pre sync with them if its not even harmful to them in any way.
Apple wrote the software (iTunes). Palm could very easily write their own software to sync if they wanted. Nokia has already done it with Nokia Multimedia Transfer.
according this article at precentral.net
http://www.precentral.net/how-palm-r...sync-webos-121
the pre now identifies itself as an ipod video:
After reading Pre Central I have not only concluded Palm is disgraceful -- I conclude Palm Pre users are pathetic!
So the argument to only sell music from Itunes store to ipod/apple/iphone owners is discriminating and anti-competetive.
What? You don't need in iPod, iPhone or Apple hardware to purchase and listen to music or movies from iTunes store.
I beg to differ!
* ITunes does not sell hardware! For any one user of an ipod there are three potential users that would buy ipods if they could use it without the stupid ITunes requirement! Just let it work as a USB mass storage device. And, lots and lots of users complain about ITunes. I think ITunes works fine but that should be up to anyone.
I never said 'iTunes sells hardware'. That would be ludicrous - "..why yes I bought my PC from Windows..." Please read my response carefully before commenting. You can use the iPod as a mass storage device. It is called Disk Mode. Look it up.
Also you don't have to use iTunes to use your iPod if you choose not to. There are alternatives. http://www.downloadsquad.com/2007/11...-alternatives/
I looked at them and chose to use iTunes to manage my iPod as I felt it was best.
* Apple is making money selling music, a simple fact you can check in the quarterly reports. So the argument to only sell music from Itunes store to ipod/apple/iphone owners is discriminating and anti-competetive. You wait and se what the courts in EU will say. And the issue is about size, this apply to any shop/system once they get a large market share. What if amazon only would sell to hispanics?
I never said that Apple doesn't make some money selling music. I implied that it was not their primary focus. There is a difference! "So the argument to only sell music from Itunes store to ipod/apple/iphone owners is discriminating and anti-competetive" Do you even know what you are saying? There is nothing anti competitive here. If you bought music on Amazon it will work fine on your iPod. There are other e-stores as well. You can bring music (CD etc) into iTunes from many sources. Or even into other iPod software alternatives. Please explain to me where the anticompetitiveness is?? "What if amazon only would sell to hispanics?" What are you talking about? Where the heck do hispanics come into this discussion? I do not live anywhere near North, South or Central America. Please keep to the subject at hand.
* Apple does not own my media, (nor adresses, calendar events etc) that I have in my ITunes library! If I previously used ipods and was forced to use ITunes then it is my property and I can make use of it ANY WAY I WANT.
Good for you. You can use your iPod to do anything you want. Paperweight, ship anchor - I don't care, and neither does Apple. Once again, no one is tying you to a table and forcing you to use iTunes, iPods or anything else for that matter. Perhaps you would be better off with a Zune. Or a Pre. Whatever.
Conclusively, Apple's mobile venture is much about lock in and it is an UGLY path of keeping customer in the "hog hen" once hooked. In contrast, Apple's computer venture used to be about freedom, remembering the 1984 Mac video (most of you here do not remember that?) about how we should not be controlled and brain washed. Now it is Apple creating a IPhone App Censorship-Nanny-state!
Conclusively? Wrong adverb my friend. Lock in is a very emotive term. A lot like Nanny State. Once again, please keep to the subject at hand and try to use terms that are contextually appropriate. if you want a mobile with data, in most countries you have to have a data contact for a period of time. Facts of life, mate. If you don't want a contract then get an iPod touch. Apples computer venture is about making products (not just computers!) that people want to use. It is also about making money. How do you justify using another companies product (iTunes) on your product without any recompense towards Apples R & D? Isn't that theft? Are you going to pay for these costs with your colossal sense of entitlement? I don't think so.
How about Palm create their own software solution? They certainly have the freedom to do that.
*sigh* Look mate, I have no intention of engaging in a war of words with you.
If you want to use an iPod, great. Use whatever software you want.
I'm going to get offline for a while and smell some air that has not previously been through my laptop. Later.
That's the problem with non-Americans. They don't understand the concept of "Right to bear arms" to defend and protect yourself. Originally this was put in to ensure American citizens had the right to defend their homeland from foreign aggressors such as Britain. Unfortunately, today it now means the right to defend your home, property and livelihood because of criminal scum that want to steal, rape, and kill your family and children.
I am glad I am allowed to own a weapon and protect my family. Gun safety is TAUGHT in my household.
Read up on the citizens of this country that saved lives by being allowed to have a concealed carry permit, or saved their families and prevented further tragedy from criminal minds.
Liberals and anti-gun twinkie loving countries can kiss my a$$. Oh, and so can PALM. They are rotting. This recent dilution is a smokescreen for their inevitable demise (demise = being bought by MSFT)
Liberals and anti-gun twinkie loving countries can kiss my a$$.
I rest my case, your Honor.
What if I said "Exactly. People supporting Apple in this are acting like 1) the Mac has a right to the same consideration on the Microsoft platform / software as a PC does; and 2) that this would be good for Microsoft."
So should MS be allowed to block iTunes in PC's? Really? Should Windows automatically delete Safari? This is a dangerous argument you are making.
Apple doesn't delete Palm desktop sync or a million other programs that COMPANIES WRITE FOR THEMSELVES. As far as I know, there are thousands of third-party programs (many of them from hardware vendors) that you can freely download and install FROM APPLE'S OWN OS X DOWNLOAD page. See how easy Apple makes that. Apple are way more open in this regard, puhlease. And Apple don't cripple any of these just because they can. Mac fans like myself use many of these third-party titles in preference to Apple's own equivalent software. The competition is encouraged.
There is evidence that iTunes and Safari are a more little restricted than they should be on Windows.
Regardless, MS sure does limit what third-party software can do. Can iTunes and WMV interoperate fully in every way? Can you use iTunes to do everything that you want to with your Zune? What ever happened to Plays For Sure and all of MS' partners? I am sure they are real fans of MS right now. MS stabbed them in the back and went for a Zune only solution. MS would love to delete or restrict a lot more than they currently do, but they have been sued five ways till Tuesday over the years. Restricting and deleting and corrupting is MS SOP.
The OS is a platform on which you are supposed to be allowed to run third-party software using the open standards it supports (there are more of these on Mac OS X). Third parties are supposed to write programs using these open standards and the public APIs supplied by the OS owner. That doesn't mean you automatically get a free pass to hack into core services or piggy-back on someone else's software.
Think about this: what if iTunes was not created by Apple, who also happen to have created the OS as well? What if Creative or someone wrote iTunes? Would we even be having this discussion? Creative would make it sync seamlessly with their players. If someone else like Palm mooched off their software, you can bet there would be issues. If HP or Epson wrote superior scanning or printing software, should the other company whine that the software doesn't run their printers and scanners just as seamlessly. I just don't get it! Be careful what you are arguing here, because pretty soon no-one will want to put any effort into writing good software -- they will be forced to let the competition use it as their own.
After reading Pre Central I have not only concluded Palm is disgraceful -- I conclude Palm Pre users are pathetic!
You praising them?
Sure they can & do.
Creative Nomad, SonicBlue Rio RioVolt, Nike psa Play, Nakamichi Soundspace and the Motorola Razr all sync directly with iTunes, not the .xml.
I made this point several pages ago, but no one paid any attention.
You argument about Apple being anti-competitive is probably from emotional standpoint, since how can a company be anti-competitive, if you have a choice.
If you know something about law you would see this is a very ignorant comment. There are a number of ways you can be anti-competetive according to law and still offer (some) freedom to customers.
Now you want EU to basically tell Apple:
You MUST offer sync ability to other electronic devices, ever though YOU have a choice not use Apple's apps and hardware.
I never said that! The part of using anti-competitive practices, is about not making *extra efforts* to block competition, which is the case here. Palm made an effort, small but still, made the effort, to let consumers use their music etc, which users rightfully own after spending money i ITunes Store. To block this is by part of the definition anti-competetive.
YOU understood the consumer model, Apple was offering you when you bought the music from their store and now, you want to change their model, since it does not suit your requirements. Then go to another music store online and make a choice!
Yes, **I** did understand! This is not about me but about the average consumer. I know I can hack the ITunes library if I want and export all contents. I also only own IPhone so there is no need. I would never buy a Pre. This is not about Pre. It is about freedom and anti-competetive practices.
But, this is the key thing, when the average consumer "buys" music from ITunes then he/she is not "buying" in the generally accepted meaning of the word. The property rights are greatly diminished due to the low utility implemented by Apple thinking in the long term. A lot of consumers are not informed of this. As a side note, the EULA is over 100 pages long and completely invalid nonsense under many EU-countries law. This could only have been written by ignorant US lawyers.
..oh, hang on.
The Palm pre has no respect for USB standards so why should Apple?
If Apple wanted to run 110 volts down USB to a spoofed iPod why should anyone stop them.
The USB-IF guidelines are obviously meaningless to Palm, why should they care?
btw your contacts, calendar etc are synced with the pre-existing software on your computer, iTunes even gives you a choice of which one to use.
you don't need iTunes to sync that information to another device.
This is not "blocking competition" it is stopping fraudulent (i.e. obtaining a benefit by deception) activity by Palm.
Access to purchased songs is not blocked by using legitimate means i.e. writing software to interface with your device and iTunes.
I never said that! The part of using anti-competitive practices, is about not making *extra efforts* to block competition, which is the case here. Palm made an effort, small but still, made the effort, to let consumers use their music etc, which users rightfully own after spending money i ITunes Store. To block this is by part of the definition anti-competetive.
It's not about "hacking" the iTunes library, many companies write software to use iTunes with their devices e.g. Nokia, Blackberry, Motorola etc
Yes, **I** did understand! This is not about me but about the average consumer. I know I can hack the ITunes library if I want and export all contents. I also only own IPhone so there is no need. I would never buy a Pre. This is not about Pre. It is about freedom and anti-competetive practices.
iTunes is acting as an agent in order to sell material WHERE THE COPYRIGHTS ARE HELD BY OTHERS, as such they have to respect the legal requirements of the copyright holders.
If you think the EU has a different, more open approach to this, I suggest you look into The Pirate Bay, and what is happening to the owners in the courts of Sweden.
But, this is the key thing, when the average consumer "buys" music from ITunes then he/she is not "buying" in the generally accepted meaning of the word. The property rights are greatly diminished due to the low utility implemented by Apple thinking in the long term. A lot of consumers are not informed of this. As a side note, the EULA is over 100 pages long and completely invalid nonsense under many EU-countries law. This could only have been written by ignorant US lawyers.
Illegal? Name the country. The USB-F publishes standards and allows companies to use their logo. If they don't want Palm to use their logo, they can send them a letter and Palm will stop. BFD.
Think about it, if an observant consumer looks at the packaging, they may not see that it is USB compatible. "How does this connect to my computer?"
They are not a government. They do not have any authority. Their opinion is somewhat important and I am disappointed in their stance but that does not mean Palm is doing something "illegal."
They are in violation of the contract they signed to become a member of the USB Consortium. Violations of contractual law is still very much illegal. I'm no expert, but could this also be a violation of the DCMA?
The big question is what is the USB Consortium going to do? This is the first time someone has spoofed another company's assigned ID that I've ever heard of. What's the precident? How to proceed?
Playing the David vs Goliath won't work for Palm on this issue, which is why their argument before the USB-IF failed miserably.
Palm is toast. If you have any stock in it, sell it now.
This whole battle seems like a losing proposition for Palm. Imagine if you bought an iphone and every week or couple of weeks it stopped syncing with your media. Eventually it gets fixed, but sooner or later it stops syncing again. This happens over and over. Regardless of who is right and who is wrong, eventually, I'd get tired of this and look for alternate solutions. Even if palm re-enables sync every time, I'd still be pissed if I was a pre user and couldn't get new media onto my phone for a few days or a few weeks every time itunes blocked it. Maybe I"d find some kind of third party software, like the missing sync, or maybe I would go for a new phone. If I went for a new phone, I doubt I'd get the new pre (whatever it was at the time I upgraded), as I know that this hassle is going to continue.
If you won't update iTunes every time new version releases you are fine with Pre.
I never said 'iTunes sells hardware'.
Rightly so, and thus It was not a quote. Nevertheless, you said 'Apple isn't in the iTunes business to sell music, they are there to sell hardware and the software...' which i was alluding to.
I still claim freeing ipods from ITunes would sell more ipods! And, freeing ITunes from ipods would sell more music! I do not understand that you all, "Palm-bashers", cannot see that whatever Apple argues, it is illegal (anti-trust law) to sell one using the freeness of the other. A very known case of this is the Netscape / IE battle with tie-in to Windows. Remember?
"So the argument to only sell music from Itunes store to ipod/apple/iphone owners is discriminating and anti-competetive" Do you even know what you are saying? There is nothing anti competitive here. If you bought music on Amazon it will work fine on your iPod. There are other e-stores as well.
Sorry, I put the "only" in the wrong place. The intended meaning was "sell music from Itunes store *only to* ipod/iphones". I know you can buy CDs etc and use with ipods. That is all good.
How do you justify using another companies product (iTunes) on your product without any recompense towards Apples R & D? Isn't that theft? Are you going to pay for these costs with your colossal sense of entitlement? I don't think so.
How about Palm create their own software solution? They certainly have the freedom to do that.
Firstly, as I stated above, you are not allowed to give away things free under any terms. Thus if Apple, unlawfully does this then this "recompense" problem is about charging (more than free) for ITunes and balancing with charging less for hardware/music. When it comes to Apple's income, it is also very hard to argue they will earn less returns of ITunes efforts, by excluding potential customers from the store.
About hispanics, I do not care where you live. The hypothetical case was just a general example that should make the absurdity clear of selecting customers to block to any store when there is no extra effort to let them in!
I agree the censorship issue, relating to App Store arbitrary rejection powers, is off topic but it fits right in with Apple's unproportionate control behaviour. Again, check the "why 1984"-video and you will know a different Apple! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8