I hate to have to admit it, but if Palm is doing this by spoofing it's VID, then the USB council is right. And if Apple is really in it to sell hardware, not music, then Palm really has no bullets to fire. *iTunes customers*, on the other hand, have standing to tell Apple to go to hell about device-locking their sync, and I hope they threaten to vote with their wallets.
But they won't; they're sheeple. Just like everyone else.
Name
· 2 months ago
A little more factual commenting, a little less Ayn Rand.
On an offnote, it's amazing how sheeple-esque the Ayn Randers are.
Apple has a right to take the software they've grown and nurtured and use it for their devices. When have we NOT seen Apple tightly control the user experience? Palm's sub-par cell phone trying to piggyback on Apple's iTunes says nothing but this:
"We at Palm are lazy. We made a sub-par phone, and can't be bothered to create compelling software for it to work with. Instead, we chose to steal the VIDs of another company we're trying to copy anyway, and use that to piggyback on the software they've spent years developing and nurturing. By the way, did we mention our phone sucks and we can't create compelling software?"
Trent Ryan
· 2 months ago
Have you even ever used the pre?
Mr Omneo
· 2 months ago
I don't know what all the fuss is about. It is possible to buy MP3s from iTunes and use another application to play them and sync them. Sure it may take a few more minutes to copy your stuff out of the iTunes folder, assuming you use the default settings. But seriously?! If that's all people have to worry about the world is in not bad shape after all.
Apple is just doing what any other over-bearing monopolistic company would do, protect it's market share as much as it can for as long as it can. Palm meanwhile will skirt along the edges of the law to do what it can to break the monopoly.
Now, where did I leave my mini-disc player?! ;)
Nick Armstrong
· 2 months ago
My opinion: the regulatory board is right. Palm should use their VID, but Apple should work with Palm to enable syncing. To ignore the Palm market (even though Palm's Pre directly competes with the iPhone) would push more of those Palm users towards Amazon's MP3 store or elsewhere. Why not encourage them to use iTunes to buy their music/audiobooks? Seems to make more business sense. Phones are phones, but those download revenues are irreplaceable.
Bryan Hauer
· 2 months ago
First - Apple uses iTunes as a tool to help sell hardware (ie. Macs, iPhone, iPods etc) which is their main source of revenue. For years iTunes was a break even business and even though it's grown with the launch of the iPhone it's still a small percentage of revenue in the overall picture. That means Apple has no reason to allow 3rd party devices to sync. They don't give a rats ass if those people are still on iTunes possibly purchasing something. They want those people buying hardware.
Second - as I've said before... If you rely on your main competitor to offer a service you're too lazy to create, then you've already lost.
It's clear based on sales that Palm is dead. They'll still get covered in the tech site for some time, but it won't be long before they give up.
Roberto Villegas
· 2 months ago
You have to remember that Apple is in the hardware business and that iTunes big selling point is to move iPods and iPhones. I think the whole iTunes sync on the Pre is more to Palm's advantage than Apple's. If Palm were smart, they would make ties with other vendors, like Amazon, but I'm not sure how successful that would be due to the market share iTunes has.
James Katt
· 2 months ago
Apple already works with anyone to enable synching with iTunes. Apple makes all of the iTunes data public. This was used by RIM, for example, to create their own Synching software with iTunes. This is the correct way to both comply with the USB regulatory body and Apple.
But Palm sucks. They are TOO LAZY to create their own synch software using open standards and open data standards as made available by Apple. DUH. The USB Standards body should SUE PALM for misuse of the USB standard.
Name
· 2 months ago
USB-IF should establish and enforce mandatory guidelines for licensing the standards-based sync, in such a way that guarantees revenue for Apple and eliminates possibility of penalization either of Palm or users.
kevinmctigue
· 2 months ago
This reminds me of the Hulu-Boxee face off.
Name
· 2 months ago
I agree, except Apple is not using an open protocol on the public Internet as Hulu is doing. As far as Hulu should be concerned Boxee is just a another browser. Now if Hulu closed itself off and required hardware IDs for specific hardware to connect then it would be the exact same thing.
prowse
· 2 months ago
First of all the USB-IF is not a regulating body, it is a standards compliance alliance. Apple will LOSE a lot of customers in other areas if it doesn't play nice with Palm and doesn't allow tethering as well as other cellphone carriers for iPhone usage. Grow up, Apple, ya big baby!
stevejobs2010
· 2 months ago
If you had any idea what you were talking about it would be a miracle.
vinnie110
· 2 months ago
You show how little you know. You seem to be an Apple basher.
Teatheing isn't an Apple issue it is provider issue. While to say other phones let you with all phones it is just acase of knowing what Network settings to use. Other providers charge extra for teathering where they see the phone type been one that will be more used as a mobile access point. At the end of the day it is down to the provider get over yourself.
So Apple are bad for changing the way iTunes and they devices ID there is nothing wrong with that. In my eyes Palm are using this as a marketing tool, just look at all the press they are getting. If you ask me with all the time and money they spend to hack there way into iTunes syncing ,yes that is what they are doing. They are fakeing the ID of there device to fool iTunes into syncing with it.
They could have just writen a GUI to use the iTunes DB like so many other developers. The real difference here is iTunes is just an extension of the shop front letting you manage your purchases.
I see no real difference between camera manufacture making software which only works with there camera. The difference is the software tends to just be ok and third parties have then gone out to give the consumer more by choosing to buy there software.
In the end as I see it Palm are just doing their customers an injustice by using smoke & mirrors to get the Pre to sync with iTunes. But this is Palm using Apple to increase it's marketing at the expense of its own customers.
Steve_M
· 2 months ago
Palm's move looks pretty desperate to me
prowse
· 2 months ago
Bullshit. PAlm never has to create a store to sell songs, this has nothing to do with selling songs, it has to do with syncing USB devices, that is all Palm needs to worry about.
prowse
· 2 months ago
Roku.
Ed B.
· 2 months ago
I think Apple is threatened, though I don't know why. With the new Blackberry Desktop Manager for Mac you can sync your iTunes to your RIM device.
With the poor battery life of the Pre I don't think there are many people using the Pre to play their music so, it's really a moot point
Geoff B.
· 2 months ago
So, uh, how many Pre owners have you talked to?
I own one and ALL of the Pre owners that I know use it to listen to music.
Raj Qaz
· 2 months ago
As per me, Palm shouldn't "appear" as Apple device. Let it use it's own ID. However, at the same time Apple needs to open up a little.
Raj Qaz
· 2 months ago
Palm should use it's own ID. Apple needs to open up a bit. In the end, customers should be happy. :)
Edward Virtually
· 2 months ago
Palm is violating the USB group's rule. Apple is violating anti-trust law by tying their iTunes music business to their hardware business. Given our legal system, Palm will probably lose, but that doesn't mean they're the worse offender morally speaking. Palm is doing what is necessary to bypass illegal market manipulation by Apple. The former wouldn't be happening if the latter were prevented.
pat10011
· 2 months ago
Bullshit. How is Apple violating anti-trust laws. They obviously aren't or they would be in court. Palm and their failing Pre can go directly to hell. Try making your own products instead of freeloading off others.
Trent Ryan
· 2 months ago
Because itunes and the ipod have a monopoly.
Richard
· 2 months ago
@zang74
Actually they do have a monopoly and they are using it to stifle competition. iPod = 95% of the MP3 market. I got an iPod touch. Before it would do anything, it made me connect it to iTunes. And then it made me give a credit card number to download FREE apps and use Genius. Also, iTunes was bundled with my iPod, and guess what? Apple won't approve any app on its OS that allows the purchase of music, because it "replicates included features". Not stifling of competition, eh?
Microsoft also has something like 95% of the OS market. When it tried to bundle Windows Media Player, it was smashed down by the EU. If Microsoft can't use it's dominance one market (OS) to promote it's music store, why should Apple?
Off-topic: I also have people who call Microsoft Micro$soft. It's a company. Of course it makes money. And guess what? So does Apple.
zang74
· 2 months ago
Monopolies—despite what some people may think—are not illegal in the US.
What *is* illegal is using a monopolistic position to crush competition, which is not the case here. Apple has not used its clout to smash down other online music stores. It doesn't stop even iPod users from using other music stores or iPod management software. It even makes the iTunes database available to any and all apps that want to use it. iTunes music is no longer even DRMed, allowing other players that support AAC (Sony, Zune) to listen to iTunes-bought tracks. iTunes uses—OMFG get this—sales and an easy-to-use front end to achieve its market dominance! How dare they!
zang74
· 2 months ago
@Richard
I didn't say Apple didn't have a monopoly. I said that monopolies are not illegal, and that Apple doesn't stifle competition against iTunes. Making you connect to iTunes is not illegal. It's Apple's syncing application for iPod owners. Making you enter a credit card as validation is not illegal either (and by the way, one can create an iTunes account with a pre-paid iTunes card or a PayPal account, too). While I don't agree with every practice in their App Store, approval of apps synced *via their iTunes software*, is their prerogative. Don't like it, jailbreak it.
Regardless, explain to me how this is anti-competitive? Why, as a manufacturer, should Apple be forced to allow—in their *own store*—an application which hijacks primary functions of the phone? That's about as ridiculous as saying Microsoft needs to be forced to sell an app on the Xbox Marketplace that turns a 360 into a fully functioning Wii. Fair competition does not mean opening your front door and making dinner for the people you compete against. In the eyes of the law, it's not anti-competitive of Apple to say no. It would be anti-competitive were Apple to block Safari on the iPhone/iPod from accessing the Amazon MP3 store, but they're not doing that, are they. It's Apple's store. They can sell whatever the hell they want to in it. Just because a very vocal anti-Apple crowd likes to call foul on most of what the company does, doesn't mean its actions are truly illegal, immoral or anti-competitive.
And please, don't patronize me by bringing up the Microsoft antitrust violations. A) It's not a fair comparison, and B) Microsoft is in a state of penalization based on all of its long list of anti-competitive actions 'til this point. Buying out companies simply to quash their competing products, forcing users to use their browser by making it inseparable from the OS, and making anti-competitive agreements with manufacturers which penalize them for *not* installing Windows on new PCs are a far cry from your idea of forcing them to sell their competitor's product.
brandonhess
· 2 months ago
@Zang74 The assumption that someone isn't violating the law merely because they're not in court is crazy naive.
zang74
· 2 months ago
@brandonhess
Then please, show me the exact laws Apple has broken.
infiniti
· 2 months ago
i think apple uses i-tunes to trap customers. customer who have invested money in i-tunes like myself have to decide if i wanna loose all the songs i have bought and get the device i wont or do i use apple and be able to keep my music sync... its not right and thats why palm is doing this because they know apple is playing dirty.... what if microsoft does a update on windows that blocks i-tunes..plam knows if this goes to court they would win(notine it hasnt gone there) consumers shouldnt be forced
Benjamin Dobson
· 2 months ago
Or you could just drag your songs out of iTunes into a folder. There's nothing stopping you now DRM is gone.
Adrian
· 2 months ago
XML data file in the itunes folder allows third party vendors like RIM to develop applications that can access the itunes folder and sync it to their device. I Think Apple even provides documentation on it so there's no trapping involved. Palm are just lazy.
Brian Hosie
· 2 months ago
Pre owners rejoice!
Bunny Tracy
· 2 months ago
I hate Apple and all their locked up for us only or take the highway devices. If Apple doesn't want ppl syncing to iTunes to get the music they paid for, so they don't have to buy the SAME SONG 10 times they need to STOP promoting/allow ppl to put iTunes on every computer OS! It's annoying to use a program that is so restrictive. There should be a way to claim your identity so you can continue to use what you PAID FOR because seriously? What's the point of buying a song or album or movie, game etc on iTunes when you can only put it on 3 computers EVER? That's a rip off. Who uses any computer for more than a year or two? Three at the MAX? So then every 4-10 years you have to purchase your entire music collection again? And in the meantime, unless you shell out all this dough for Apple products, forget taking your music with you anywhere? THAT'S BULL. The reason most ppl use iTunes is for the convenience of storing all their music etc in one place and then being able to transfer it to mobile devices, as soon as you take that away only Apple lovers will stick with it, they might as well just go back in time 10 years before iTunes and iPods hit the world and only Apple people even know WTH Apple was. This just makes me never want to buy anything Apple again, hardware, iTunes or otherwise. >(
zpjet
· 2 months ago
sorry bunny, i don't think you checked the facts, i've had four macs since 2001 (couldn't afford one before because i'm from eastern europe, but white laptops changed the game) and never had to re-buy any music. you could share the music between five computers in the past and now when everything is drm-free (steve jobs came with the initiative) you could put it on any device. there were even cases when people lost their hard drives, they could re-download their music for free. plus, i don't think an iPod is very expensive... if you can afford a computer and internet connection already.
BoyBunny
· 2 months ago
zpjet
Get your tongue out of Steve Jobs sphincter. I have purchased FIVE macs since 2001 and they all sucked. They all used lock in to the detriment of the users. I personally will never buy another product with an apple logo on it.
Steve did NOT come up with the idea of DRM free. He bent to pressure from vocal people online like myself who told Apple that they were a crappy company that was just as evil as Microsoft... in fact, in recent years, more so.
And claiming that people have the choice of moving files, you really have no clue about your average user. They don't understand directories and files. A situation that was created BY APPLE with the dumbing down of the file handling with set directories for each file type, and background management of the files that the user never has control of.
Coollead
· 2 months ago
Um...I think it's you that should go back a few years and check the news about Apple dropping DRM.
The songs are yours to do with what you like after you download them. Also, the bit about "Having to buy your songs again"? You can have 5 computers tied to one iTunes account. If you get a sixth computer, you can just deactivate one of the other computers you no longer use. (Although, with DRM-free music, this really doesn't matter.)
If you're going to type up such a long rant, it would behoove you to know what you're talking about first.
erwaggoner
· 2 months ago
Okay, here's my take...Microsoft fucks over each and every one of it's customers with Genuine Advantage and such and if Apple wants to protect what is pretty much their flagship software application, let them. Why would you want to use iTunes if you don't have an iPod anyway? It's a good program, but not that much better than the numerous other media-management programs available. While I commend Palm (and Sprint for that matter) for wanting to let their customers have freedom (something AT&T could and really should take a cue from) Apple can lock down their program if they want.
Benjamin Dobson
· 2 months ago
Palm should give up. I don't see how they can win, so they'd be better off focusing resources on new features, whilst releasing a clean sync method, a la BlackBerry Desktop.
I can't see how Palm can possibly justify using an unsupported, potentially illegal way to sync with iTunes when there is a perfectly good, supported way to do that already.
orsonwelles
· 2 months ago
I don't know why it's so hard for people to get their facts straight. Apple has always allowed for syncing of another device to the iTunes Library by using the APPLE-PROVIDED API. RIM does this. It syncs to a user's iTunes Library. BECAUSE THEY WROTE THEIR OWN SOFTWARE THAT CONNECTS USING THE ITUNES API.
Palm is simply lazy, or are so on their last legs that they can't even write a decent piece of software. Apple is not preventing Palm from syncing to a user's iTunes Library, it's keeping Palm from masquerading as an iPod and mooching of Apple's own software. PALM, JUST GO WRITE YOUR OWN CONNECTION UTILITY. APPLE ALLOWS.
And people, GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.
Anonymous
· 2 months ago
Until the iPhone gets a keyboard and a real multitasking interface...
facebook-578340406
· 2 months ago
Alright, PALM should clearly back down here. Unless it has written permission from Apple to use Apple's software program, any form of integration is a violation.
I do think that this spat is a bit childish of two companies that have glorious pasts and hope that they can come to terms soon enough. How about PALM gives Apple the ability to switch apps using the card-like interface, and Apple allows iTunes syncing ;-)?
camkevbell
· 2 months ago
Like I said in an earlier post: It's funny that the so called "iPhone killer" is reduced to sniffing for crumbs under Apple's table.
DossyDomo
· 2 months ago
OUtstanding, way to go Palm Pre you guys ROCK as usual!
"control of market supply: a situation in which one company controls an industry or is the only provider of a product or service"
While Apple Corp. is a Hardware manufacturer the itunes Music Store is not. The EU ruled that Apple was violated antitrust laws with itunes, but only dropped the case after they opened up itunes in Europe. Apple should back-off or work with Palm and other companies wishing to sync with itunes. It really is not going to hurt their market much and may even improve their quickly falling image in the eyes of many people.
Plus the Amazon music store is looking better and better everyday and you can download right to the PalmPre.
Um, the Pre is NOT a DIRECT iphone competitor. One phone is GSM one isn't. It is a bit distasteful as a market leader that Apple continues to block devices from making an all-inclusive connection to its software, especially for a company that not that long ago was a bastard son of the tech realm. They're far from emulating Microsoft, but they seem to be catching up as a regime. I cant believe there are people who BUY music online any way... and a USB quality standards group siding with the fiscally fit firm is absolutely no surprise to me. I think Palm should keep up the fight, Apple is getting a bit too comfy.
Jack Foster Mancilla
· 2 months ago
Palm is in the wrong, and will eventually lose. … But they are in survival mode, the iPhone has run away with all their customers, and they are doing everything they can to bring them back. It is a loosing battle, the company is doomed.
Name
· 2 months ago
Palm should give it up. Thats just gotta be frustrating for their users... it works, it doesnt, it works it doesnt... Thats ridiculous.
MrBillyWhite
· 2 months ago
I know that none of this is going to be in Apple's best interests, but for users, allowing iTunes support is fantastic. Hopefully this time it will stay, and then maybe this will pave the way for other mobile devices to allow sync via iTunes (ie, S60 and Android phones)
Omar Chatah
· 2 months ago
this is ridiculous!
Palm should instead develop the open source platform SONGBIRD (which is not quite up to par with iTunes at this stage) and promote an OPEN platform for all digital media.
Pros: 1. Not violate USB-IF requirements 2. Promote open-source software and compatibility 3. Long-term will break stranglehold of iTunes on digital media 4. Provide greater sources of legally purchasable digital media
Cons: 1. Takes more effort than spoofing a USB identifier
Come on Palm... show us how much you "get it"....
Matt Johnson
· 2 months ago
In the past few years the top technology companies have been trying to stampe anyone trying to step over their turfs. Google Orkut turning off Contact Export, Wave having an engine for IE, Microsoft asking you to download a small software to make your default home page to bing.com AND prevent any other 3rd party service provider to mingle with it. Apple blocking out Palm Pre syncing.... it is now getting to the survival of the fittest... and I'm thoroughly getting excited about the wit of some of these folks as they do it.
jawey
· 2 months ago
If I can sync the music I download using bit-torents with my Pre than Apple can just go and fuck itself.
JD
· 2 months ago
Quit. Hey Palm, why not try innovation? Create your own cool music application. Or buy one like Apple did with SoundJam. Apple just made SoundJam way cooler. More cool than the SoundJam people could have ever done.
I'm a strong believer in the remix. Palm has demonstrated exactly that by innovating and attaching itself to iTunes. Given that Apple is a company that's founded and built on remix culture, it only makes sense of Apple to allow Palm to sync. I highly doubt it will in any noticeable way affect apple's sales. If anything it will do Apple some good.
David E. Curtis
· 1 month ago
The fact of the matter is I don't care about the little legal battle going on. When I own something especially if I invested money in it, I feel obligated to do whatever I like with it, that includes using the software and my own devices.
If it is on my machine, I expect it to play nice with my other devices. iTunes already monopoloizes the music I play on it so the least apple should do is allow the music to be transferable to devices that I would like my music on. If they don't like it, it should stop hiding the music and only allowing it to be Burned to disc while iTunes is installed, which is the big problem here.
All Comments
But they won't; they're sheeple. Just like everyone else.
On an offnote, it's amazing how sheeple-esque the Ayn Randers are.
"We at Palm are lazy. We made a sub-par phone, and can't be bothered to create compelling software for it to work with. Instead, we chose to steal the VIDs of another company we're trying to copy anyway, and use that to piggyback on the software they've spent years developing and nurturing. By the way, did we mention our phone sucks and we can't create compelling software?"
Apple is just doing what any other over-bearing monopolistic company would do, protect it's market share as much as it can for as long as it can. Palm meanwhile will skirt along the edges of the law to do what it can to break the monopoly.
Now, where did I leave my mini-disc player?! ;)
Second - as I've said before... If you rely on your main competitor to offer a service you're too lazy to create, then you've already lost.
It's clear based on sales that Palm is dead. They'll still get covered in the tech site for some time, but it won't be long before they give up.
But Palm sucks. They are TOO LAZY to create their own synch software using open standards and open data standards as made available by Apple. DUH. The USB Standards body should SUE PALM for misuse of the USB standard.
Teatheing isn't an Apple issue it is provider issue. While to say other phones let you with all phones it is just acase of knowing what Network settings to use. Other providers charge extra for teathering where they see the phone type been one that will be more used as a mobile access point. At the end of the day it is down to the provider get over yourself.
So Apple are bad for changing the way iTunes and they devices ID there is nothing wrong with that. In my eyes Palm are using this as a marketing tool, just look at all the press they are getting. If you ask me with all the time and money they spend to hack there way into iTunes syncing ,yes that is what they are doing. They are fakeing the ID of there device to fool iTunes into syncing with it.
They could have just writen a GUI to use the iTunes DB like so many other developers. The real difference here is iTunes is just an extension of the shop front letting you manage your purchases.
I see no real difference between camera manufacture making software which only works with there camera. The difference is the software tends to just be ok and third parties have then gone out to give the consumer more by choosing to buy there software.
In the end as I see it Palm are just doing their customers an injustice by using smoke & mirrors to get the Pre to sync with iTunes. But this is Palm using Apple to increase it's marketing at the expense of its own customers.
With the poor battery life of the Pre I don't think there are many people using the Pre to play their music so, it's really a moot point
I own one and ALL of the Pre owners that I know use it to listen to music.
Actually they do have a monopoly and they are using it to stifle competition. iPod = 95% of the MP3 market. I got an iPod touch. Before it would do anything, it made me connect it to iTunes. And then it made me give a credit card number to download FREE apps and use Genius. Also, iTunes was bundled with my iPod, and guess what? Apple won't approve any app on its OS that allows the purchase of music, because it "replicates included features". Not stifling of competition, eh?
Microsoft also has something like 95% of the OS market. When it tried to bundle Windows Media Player, it was smashed down by the EU. If Microsoft can't use it's dominance one market (OS) to promote it's music store, why should Apple?
Off-topic: I also have people who call Microsoft Micro$soft. It's a company. Of course it makes money. And guess what? So does Apple.
What *is* illegal is using a monopolistic position to crush competition, which is not the case here. Apple has not used its clout to smash down other online music stores. It doesn't stop even iPod users from using other music stores or iPod management software. It even makes the iTunes database available to any and all apps that want to use it. iTunes music is no longer even DRMed, allowing other players that support AAC (Sony, Zune) to listen to iTunes-bought tracks. iTunes uses—OMFG get this—sales and an easy-to-use front end to achieve its market dominance! How dare they!
I didn't say Apple didn't have a monopoly. I said that monopolies are not illegal, and that Apple doesn't stifle competition against iTunes. Making you connect to iTunes is not illegal. It's Apple's syncing application for iPod owners. Making you enter a credit card as validation is not illegal either (and by the way, one can create an iTunes account with a pre-paid iTunes card or a PayPal account, too). While I don't agree with every practice in their App Store, approval of apps synced *via their iTunes software*, is their prerogative. Don't like it, jailbreak it.
Regardless, explain to me how this is anti-competitive? Why, as a manufacturer, should Apple be forced to allow—in their *own store*—an application which hijacks primary functions of the phone? That's about as ridiculous as saying Microsoft needs to be forced to sell an app on the Xbox Marketplace that turns a 360 into a fully functioning Wii. Fair competition does not mean opening your front door and making dinner for the people you compete against. In the eyes of the law, it's not anti-competitive of Apple to say no. It would be anti-competitive were Apple to block Safari on the iPhone/iPod from accessing the Amazon MP3 store, but they're not doing that, are they. It's Apple's store. They can sell whatever the hell they want to in it. Just because a very vocal anti-Apple crowd likes to call foul on most of what the company does, doesn't mean its actions are truly illegal, immoral or anti-competitive.
And please, don't patronize me by bringing up the Microsoft antitrust violations. A) It's not a fair comparison, and B) Microsoft is in a state of penalization based on all of its long list of anti-competitive actions 'til this point. Buying out companies simply to quash their competing products, forcing users to use their browser by making it inseparable from the OS, and making anti-competitive agreements with manufacturers which penalize them for *not* installing Windows on new PCs are a far cry from your idea of forcing them to sell their competitor's product.
Then please, show me the exact laws Apple has broken.
Get your tongue out of Steve Jobs sphincter. I have purchased FIVE macs since 2001 and they all sucked. They all used lock in to the detriment of the users. I personally will never buy another product with an apple logo on it.
Steve did NOT come up with the idea of DRM free. He bent to pressure from vocal people online like myself who told Apple that they were a crappy company that was just as evil as Microsoft... in fact, in recent years, more so.
And claiming that people have the choice of moving files, you really have no clue about your average user. They don't understand directories and files. A situation that was created BY APPLE with the dumbing down of the file handling with set directories for each file type, and background management of the files that the user never has control of.
The songs are yours to do with what you like after you download them. Also, the bit about "Having to buy your songs again"? You can have 5 computers tied to one iTunes account. If you get a sixth computer, you can just deactivate one of the other computers you no longer use. (Although, with DRM-free music, this really doesn't matter.)
If you're going to type up such a long rant, it would behoove you to know what you're talking about first.
I can't see how Palm can possibly justify using an unsupported, potentially illegal way to sync with iTunes when there is a perfectly good, supported way to do that already.
Palm is simply lazy, or are so on their last legs that they can't even write a decent piece of software. Apple is not preventing Palm from syncing to a user's iTunes Library, it's keeping Palm from masquerading as an iPod and mooching of Apple's own software. PALM, JUST GO WRITE YOUR OWN CONNECTION UTILITY. APPLE ALLOWS.
And people, GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.
I do think that this spat is a bit childish of two companies that have glorious pasts and hope that they can come to terms soon enough. How about PALM gives Apple the ability to switch apps using the card-like interface, and Apple allows iTunes syncing ;-)?
ER
www.complete-privacy.net.tc
"control of market supply: a situation in which one company controls an industry or is the only provider of a product or service"
While Apple Corp. is a Hardware manufacturer the itunes Music Store is not. The EU ruled that Apple was violated antitrust laws with itunes, but only dropped the case after they opened up itunes in Europe. Apple should back-off or work with Palm and other companies wishing to sync with itunes. It really is not going to hurt their market much and may even improve their quickly falling image in the eyes of many people.
Plus the Amazon music store is looking better and better everyday and you can download right to the PalmPre.
Palm should instead develop the open source platform SONGBIRD (which is not quite up to par with iTunes at this stage) and promote an OPEN platform for all digital media.
Pros:
1. Not violate USB-IF requirements
2. Promote open-source software and compatibility
3. Long-term will break stranglehold of iTunes on digital media
4. Provide greater sources of legally purchasable digital media
Cons:
1. Takes more effort than spoofing a USB identifier
Come on Palm... show us how much you "get it"....
Innovate!
http://www.seodoom.info/2009/09/what-is-meant-b...
If it is on my machine, I expect it to play nice with my other devices. iTunes already monopoloizes the music I play on it so the least apple should do is allow the music to be transferable to devices that I would like my music on. If they don't like it, it should stop hiding the music and only allowing it to be Burned to disc while iTunes is installed, which is the big problem here.