Slashdot Mirror


Palm Pre To Sync Seamlessly With iTunes

Wired is reporting that Palm's new handheld device, the Pre, will be able to sync automagically with Apple's iTunes. Thanks to a team of ex-Apple engineers the Pre will sync everything but iPhone applications and some of the older Fairplay DRM music. "It does it by faking out iTunes, making the jukebox software think that it is connected to a real iPod. Hook it up and you'll be given three options: USB mass storage device, charging only or iTunes sync. This is a ballsy move from Palm, and we totally love it: a big fat middle finger at Apple. Apple will, we are sure, be readying its legal attack dogs as I write, and don't be at all surprised if an iTunes update pops up around June 6th. This fight just got a lot more interesting."

178 comments

  1. This should be interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    While I enjoy the big fat middle finger to Apple as much as the next guy, I firmly expect Apple to give the big fat legal cock in the ass back to Palm.

    And when it comes to a winner, the middle finger loses to the fat cock every time.

    1. Re:This should be interesting by larry+bagina · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      What about the middle finder in the cock?

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  2. Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by eldavojohn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Plug the Pre into a PC and you're offered the option of using the device as a USB drive, charging it or beginning a "media sync." Interesting, using media sync the Pre does indeed sync with iTunes, though it's hamstrung by Apple's DRM protected songs. Can't imagine Apple's too happy about that. Presumably, Apple legal is already drafting a letter. Pre appears to make iTunes think it's an iPod.

    How is Apple going to feel about that, asks Walt. Rubinstein dodges a bit noting that there are a variety of ways of getting music out of iTunes. Walt pushes back pointing out that this is the first non-Apple device that is recognized as an Apple device by a Mac. Rubinstein dodges again. Seems he's pretty obviously using his Apple knowledge here. McNamee jumps in. Apple is "practically a monopolist," he says, adding that people should be able to use music that they purchase in what ever way they see fit.

    Such a letter would be the stupidest move Apple has made in a long time. I already view them as monopolistic bastards with their iTunes website & iTunes application & iTunes DRM & iPod/iPhone lock-in scheme. I am sick and tired of explaining to my friends and family how to burn a DRM'd song from their computer to a CD and then rip that CD to an MP3 and then put that MP3 on their player of choice.

    I am begging Palm to sue the hell out of Apple if Apple comes after them. Palm should sue Apple to release an API to interface with iTunes music store and utilize iTunes DRM (I'm not against DRM if the artist wants it just so long as anyone can use it in their applications) and also an API for hardware manufacturers to plug into iTunes! Am I the only person on earth that sees the necessity in this? Am I the only person on earth that sees this as a direct affront to a free market system?! How is this any different from Microsoft packaging IE with Windows?! In my book it's worse since it transcends so many different industries--not just software!

    Apple's evilest move would be to just watch this happen and throw a wrench into the works every time they do an update to iTunes. Let Palm spend hours trying to figure it out so the Pre still interfaces with it. That way the consumers will experience bumps, be more prone to buying iPhones and if anyone sues them for monopolistic practices they can throw their hands up in defense and say, "What!? The Pre works fine with iTunes! I don't know why you can't figure it out!"

    I'm so sick of this whole mess that I personally buy CDs or Amazon MP3s, rip the CDs with CDex to a format of my choice and then move said songs to my MP3 player of choice. Hell, I can play my music on my DVD player if I put it on the correct media.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Am I the only person on earth that sees this as a direct affront to a free market system?!

      I do not think that term means what you think it means: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    2. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by moosesocks · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I was with you up until the DRM part. The iTunes store is almost entirely DRM-free by now.

      If you don't like AAC either, Amazon.com sells MP3 downloads that are cheaper than iTunes downloads, and has about the same selection. iTunes was once a monopoly, although Apple's DRM practices ironically ended that rather quickly.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    3. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I already view them as monopolistic bastards with their iTunes website & iTunes application & iTunes DRM & iPod/iPhone lock-in scheme.

      I guess you're entitled to view them as monopolists, but that doesn't mean that view accords with real world legal definitions. There are other sources for digital content online, and there are other players - Apple has a big chunk of the market, but by no means do they have total control - facts you note at the end of your post. Also, let's not forget that a big chunk of the pricing of content is driven by the deals the content providers are willing to cut with Apple - remember the recent change to a tiered pricing scheme from the $.99 for all music.

      How is Apple a monopoly, if we understand the term monopoly to mean something other than "a company you don't like/does things that displease you?"

    4. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by mea37 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Meh. Lock-in across product lines is older than dirt. Its practice doesn't make a company "monopolistic" (though its practice by a monopoly can sometimes be illegal, which may be why you associate the two things).

      Anyway, you appear to be wishing for legal action based on how much you like each company's actions rather than on any legal facts; which means you're also not looking at an accurate picture of the costs and outcomes if legal action does occur.

      I won't speculate on the issues that would matter in a court case (such as whether any trade secrets were utilized by the ex-Apple engineers that allegedly made this work), but I will say that without knowing the details of those issues, I wouldn't be begging anyone to start casting legal stones.

    5. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by nine-times · · Score: 1

      I don't think Apple is selling any music with DRM anymore. They issued an announcement a few weeks ago that their transition was done. Videos and Audible books still have DRM AFAIK.

    6. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by DavidR1991 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The Pre is pretending to be an iPod in order to sync. Whilst killing monopolies is great, I'm fairly sure that imitating the iPod crosses a legal line somewhere (presumably reverse engineering employed in order to respond to iTunes' requests etc.) and that Apple have every right to sue.

    7. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The DMCA is the regulation that makes breaking DRM-based vendor lock-in illegal, regardless of other legal issues. Perhaps you don't understand what you linked to.

    8. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by bennomatic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I wish I had mod points because this is a smart response. I hate it when people use the word "monopoly" as a synonym for "I don't like them." If there's a real reason not to like Apple--even a bad one, like, "I always prefer the underdog," is better than none--then use it. Don't just call it a monopoly.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    9. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      I don't think Apple is selling any music with DRM anymore. They issued an announcement a few weeks ago that their transition was done. Videos and Audible books still have DRM AFAIK.

      Right, but the original quote specifically referred to "older" Fairplay-encumbered music. Not everyone made the choice to pay 30 cents a song to upgrade their already-purchased songs (although I did, FWIW).

      I'll be curious to see what Apple does here. I'd think in the long run it'd work better for them, and their customers, if they'd help Palm accomplish this rather than to fight them - but we'll see what happens.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    10. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by AndrewNeo · · Score: 1

      I do believe it was said that there is on-device Amazon MP3 store support, like on the G1, too.

    11. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Aladrin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Perhaps you don't understand what he linked to. Let me reproduce the very first sentence again.

      "A free market is a theoretical term that economists use to describe a market which is free from government intervention (i.e. no regulation, no subsidization, no single monetary system and no governmental monopolies)."

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    12. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 0

      How is Apple a monopoly, if we understand the term monopoly to mean something other than "a company you don't like/does things that displease you?"

      Wait, like Microsoft?

      It isn't the market share that makes a monopoly, it is what they do with it. Apple's negotiating power with the members of the RIAA cartel is very close to that, only we don't mind so much because Apple is actually the lesser evil.

      But Apple does use its market share with music players to create lock-in in the markets of computers and mobile phones. How is that different than what Microsoft did/does?

    13. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by jedidiah · · Score: 0

      "no governmental monopolies"

      My isn't this a convenient little bit of wording.

      So a market is "free" so long as the monopolies aren't "governmental".

      What a load of dairy fertilizer.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    14. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by larry+bagina · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hardware manufacturers can write a driver so their junk interface with iTunes. Nomads and RIOs work with iTunes.

      Palm Pre syncs with iTunes? Big deal. The real story (or "fuck you") is that they're using webkit.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    15. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Let's see...

      They have the lion's share of the player market.

      They have the lion's share of the online media market.

      They place artificial compatability barriers excluding others from their media market and players.

      The whole reason that music went DRM free is because the
      actual producers/distributors of the music realized just
      how much power they had handed Apple.

      The DMCA gives Apple a nice club that they can beat anyone
      over the head with should they dare to reverse engineer
      enough information to get an iTunes movie onto the player
      of their choice or get an iTunes song onto the OS of their
      choice.

      The labels have started to route around the problem but that
      is still a work in progress.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    16. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Apple's negotiating power with the members of the RIAA cartel is very close to that, only we don't mind so much because Apple is actually the lesser evil.

      You mean the same negotiating power that introduced "variable pricing", which meant that "pretty much any vaguely popular or contemporary song" immediately jumped 30% in price, from 99c to $1.29, whilst Apple fanboys tried to spin it as "well, most tracks are going to go DOWN to 69c!", where "most tracks" was a synonym for "obscure low selling acts that you're lucky to have heard of, let alone desire to purchase" (seriously, did anyone but the most deranged Apple fan honestly believe that Apple and the record labels were going to voluntarily offer up a 30% reduction in revenue?)?

      Who won out of that? Apple got a nice kick, and so did the labels. You and I didn't.

      I'm not exactly sure why you're trumpeting that as a testament to "Apple's negotiating power", but okay...

    17. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 1

      Ignoring the stupidity of ideologues confusing the philosophical ideal of "laissez-faire" with the much more generic term "free market", all I have to say to you is WHOOSH!

    18. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Such a letter would be the stupidest move Apple has made in a long time.

      I bet if we asked Slashdot readers, they could come up with a few other ones.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    19. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Lock-in across product lines is older than dirt. Its practice doesn't make a company "monopolistic"

      No, it makes them unpalatable to customers who like to have a lot of choices for how to use the products they buy.

      The original reason I didn't buy an iPod was because I didn't want to have to use iTunes. When other options became available, I had already become a customer of other manufacturers of mp3 players.

      The original reason I didn't buy an iPhone was because I didn't like the idea of having to use AT&T. By the time iPhones will work with other carriers, I'll already be happy with some other manufacturer's smart phone.

      I started using the Apple operating system during the brief few years that Apple was licensing to other hardware manufacturers. I really liked the interface and got extremely comfortable with some Apple apps, such as Logic Audio Platinum. I was very unhappy when Apple withdrew their licensing program, but I still keep at least one Apple computer in my studio, now with Logic Pro. Because of the limitation to only Apple hardware, if Logic Pro was ever available for Windows, I probably wouldn't buy another Mac Pro. As it is, I use it less and less now that Reaper is my go-to DAW application.

      I think Apple makes some great products, but by locking them down and limiting their use, they become much less attractive to me. Fortunately for them, there are plenty of people who can afford to buy Apple, and don't care about having choice. You will hear these people defending Apple's appstore policies, their phone carrier lockins, how wonderful iTunes is.

      This is what keeps Apple's share of the PC market pretty static. The people who really care about personal computing care a lot more about having choices than the people who buy consumer electronics, I think.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    20. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Sax+Maniac · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Reverse engineering is perfectly legal for interoperability, if you don't copy the implementation code. My friend's company legally clean-room reverse engineered all of CIFS, so their proprietary boxes can act as a stand-in for Windows.

      --
      I can explanate how to administrate your network. You must configurate and segmentate it, so it can computate.
    21. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Compholio · · Score: 2, Funny

      Am I the only person on earth that sees this as a direct affront to a free market system?!

      I do not think that term means what you think it means: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market

      Inconceivable!

    22. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Own3d-You · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wasn't that all to do with the music industry refusing to let Apple sell DRM free music? As opposed to "Apple's DRM practices".

    23. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Um, the modern/legal definition of monopoly doesn't mean you have to have 100% market share to be considered a monopoly. Apple's overwhelming market share is close enough.

      Also, being a monopoly is not in itself illegal, or necessarily a bad thing.

      Next up: why Apple isn't literally a "bastard", but acts like one anyways.

    24. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by homesnatch · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That was the first real battle that Apple lost against the RIAA. Apple threatened to stop selling if the pricing went over 99 cents, but that bluff was called.

    25. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by DavidR1991 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, but RTA - the guys working on the project are ex-Apple employees. Dodgy much?

    26. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by oldhack · · Score: 1, Troll

      Shut up you monopolist pig.

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    27. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by deathtopaulw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Lock-in has nothing to do with a monopoly. It's their player, they can do whatever they want with it. Buy a different player.

    28. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by arb+phd+slp · · Score: 3, Funny

      I've put off upgrading because I don't want to spend 0.30 on the free tracks I got from the Pepsi promotion. I didn't spend all that time looking through the bottoms of Sierra Mist bottles just so I could turn around and buy all those songs.

      --
      There's a perfect xkcd for my sig but I'm too lazy to look it up. sudo someone go find it.
    29. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      I think the original poster really meant to refer to "an ideal free market" which is a theoretical construct use to model economic systems.

      And really, free market systems break down because there is no such thing as an ideal free market.

      I think waht he really meant, when you break it down, is a freely competitive system, which usually requires government intervention to make it so -- which is what he is calling for.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    30. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by nog_lorp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Of course it does. Having a monopoly is legal. Abusing a monopoly to create lock-in is the illegal part.

    31. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hardware manufacturers can write a driver so their junk interface with iTunes.

      I am aware only of the iTunes COM/AppleScript APIs that allow third-party applications to access the iTunes library; then, these applications can perform whatever kind of operations they like.

      These APIs do not provide a mechanism for third-party devices to show up in iTunes. Instead, they allow other processes to get information to implement their own synchronization.

      The Palm Pre's iTunes support apparently works by presenting itself as an iPod USB device, which requires no extra software and uses the same interface as an iPod would.

    32. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      The DMCA is the regulation that makes breaking DRM-based vendor lock-in illegal

      Only, ONLY, if you circumvent the DRM. If you implement and respect the DRM, you're (pretty much) just fine.

      Or you could do what Palm actually did, and just, you know, ignore DRM. No DRM == no protection scheme == no DMCA.

    33. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Lars+T. · · Score: 1, Insightful

      That was the first real battle that Apple lost against the RIAA. Apple threatened to stop selling if the pricing went over 99 cents, but that bluff was called.

      Wow, and you want more proof that Apple has a monopoly? [/sarcasm]

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    34. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by immcintosh · · Score: 1

      The DMCA is the regulation

      free from government intervention

      The DMCA is a government regulation. A "free market" is a market that's free from government intervention, your quote specifically mentioning regulation. Did you even read what the GP wrote?

    35. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Wooky_linuxer · · Score: 1

      The DMCA gives Apple a nice club that they can beat anyone over the head with should they dare to reverse engineer enough information to get an iTunes movie onto the player of their choice or get an iTunes song onto the OS of their choice.

      Not really. Even the evil DMCA explicitly allows reverse engineering for the sake of compatibility. I hardly believe they'll be able to fight using it. It's easier just to change iTunes in such a way that breaks Palm's implementation - but then, if Palm is smart enough, it might break some older iPod models as well, and users can't be forced to upgrade.

      --
      Where is that guy who'd die defending what I had to say when I need him?
    36. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      That doesn't make much sense to me. Why would Apple ever care about DRM if it wasn't part of an agreement with the recording industry? DRM doesn't benefit them in this area. You can rip a CD in iTunes and the files can be easily copied out and imported into any player that supports AAC (or MP3 if you chose to encode them that way). Apple don't care about 3rd party players, they have no need to when people are satisfied with the iTunes and iPod combo. Sure, they don't go out of their way to make it seamless to switch, but that's not the same as trying to prevent people from doing so. You can also import media from other online stores into iTunes as long as it has no DRM and isn't in some proprietary format. If you have evidence that the removal of DRM from music was opposed by Apple, please post it.

    37. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by DinDaddy · · Score: 2, Informative

      The whole reason that music went DRM free is because the
      actual producers/distributors of the music realized just
      how much power they had handed Apple.

      . . .when they required Apple to apply DRM in the first place (which was the only reason it had ever had it).

    38. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      If I buy it, it becomes my property.

      I should be able to plug it into anything I want without the threat of legal bullying.

      iTunes is a government enforced monopoly.

      You know, Jobs really should have thought that through a little better. You see, if
      you force the discriminating user to choose between MacOS and Windows by intentionally
      locking out Linux you are likely to only make the Windows monopoly stronger.

      I can convince the wife to run Linux. MacOS is a harder sell. She sees the walled
      garden for what it is and actually objects to it even more strongly than I do. She
      would not run a Mac just to access the iPhone in this mostly Linux running household
      despite the fact that we've got a number of them lying around.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    39. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can convince the wife to run Linux. MacOS is a harder sell. She sees the walled garden for what it is and actually objects to it even more strongly than I do. She would not run a Mac just to access the iPhone in this mostly Linux running household despite the fact that we've got a number of them lying around.

      Linux is UNIX.

      MacOS X is UNIX, but with professionals designing the user interfaces instead of amateurs.

      Shouldn't be a hard sell unless you enjoy spending your Friday nights recompiling your kernel (most of us outgrew that fascination freshman year, somewhere around the time we discovered girls have tits.)

      Oh, and Windows is feces in a shiny hologrammed box, subsidized to you by your hardware provider, and possibly your employer or alma mater. If you'll buy that, perhaps you'd be interested in this Cleveland Steamer...

    40. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by wall0159 · · Score: 1

      Which is supported by the fact that things completely in Apple's control, like the App store, lack DRM.
      Oh, wait...

    41. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by socsoc · · Score: 1

      I am sick and tired of explaining to my friends and family how to burn a DRM'd song from their computer to a CD and then rip that CD to an MP3 and then put that MP3 on their player of choice.

      Then why don't you explain to them a single time about not supporting the broken marketplace and instead buying DRM-free music to begin with?

    42. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sound bitter... bordering on "owed".

      Go buy from Amazon if you don't like iTunes.

    43. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by feepness · · Score: 1

      "A free market is a theoretical term that economists use to describe a market which is free from government intervention (i.e. no regulation, no subsidization, no single monetary system and no governmental monopolies)."

      Let me add this, because that is the definition most people think of, and it is not quite complete:

      "By definition, buyers and sellers do not coerce each other, in the sense that they obtain each other's property without the use of physical force, threat of physical force, or fraud,"

      So "free market" is more a theoretical thought experiment rather than something that can be created. Attempting to implement it in the real world is called "lassez-faire". I think there are very few people who actually want a purely free market.

      Even Libertarians generally seek mixed markets, just to a lesser degree than some other political leanings.

      Someone who wanted pure "lassez-faire" would be more of an Anarchist.

    44. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since you brought up the concept of it's definition, it would have been nice if you had any concept of what that definition was.

      A monopoly does not mean you necessarily have 100% domination of a market, only that your domination is enough to influence the market as a whole.

      Apple has significant control of two markets. The digital download market, and the personal music player market.

      Apple apparently controls 80% or more of the legal download market, and it uses that power to discourage consumers from buying any players other than Apple branded devices. Why buy a device that does not work synch with iTunes without a hack? (sorry, a list of 20 comapatible devices does not impress me).

      Apple currently has about 86% of the personal player market, down from over 90% a few years ago. By refusing to support DRM formats other than their own, and by refusing to license FairPlay openly, they forced every other wannabe music store to go with DRM free the MP3 format. That let apple keep their proprietary format lock-in for a while denying every other store the privilege. If that is not influencing the market as a whole, what is?

      That was a backfire on their part. Apple did not ever want to offer DRM free music. There were independent bands that begged Apple to sell their music DRM free, and Apple refused. Apple just never counted on the music publishers allowing DRM music to be sold on the Internet. If you don't belive that and you'd raher take the word of Steve Jobs when he claimed they wanted to open the formats, I would remind you of the early days when they shoved out the BS lines about not licensing FairPlay for security reasons, and then in the next breath they would tell people to Burn-Rip-Play to get around their own DRM format.

    45. Re:Sue Those Monopolistic Apple Bastards! by Unequivocal · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up: insightful.

      Apple is definitely the new Microsoft.

  3. Right. by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1, Troll

    I'm sure that Apple won't find a way to break this in an iTunes update down the road. They certainly have no history of breaking unlicensed addons... Nope...

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  4. Why is this a big deal? by Enuratique · · Score: 5, Informative

    iTunes currently supports about 20 non-iPod devices:
    Nomad II Creative Labs USB
    Nomad II MG Creative Labs USB
    Nomad II c Creative Labs USB
    Nomad Jukebox Creative Labs USB
    Nomad Jukebox 20GB Creative Labs USB
    Nomad Jukebox C Creative Labs USB
    Novad MuVo Creative Labs USB
    Rio One SONICBlue/S3 USB
    Rio 500 SONICBlue/S3 USB
    Rio 600 SONICBlue/S3 USB
    Rio 800 SONICBlue/S3 USB
    Rio 900 SONICBlue/S3 USB
    Rio S10 SONICBlue/S3 USB
    Rio S11 SONICBlue/S3 USB
    Rio S30S SONICBlue/S3 USB
    Rio S35S SONICBlue/S3 USB
    Rio S50 SONICBlue/S3 USB
    Rio Chiba SONICBlue/S3 USB
    Rio Fuse SONICBlue/S3 USB
    Rio Cali SONICBlue/S3 USB
    psa]play 60 Nike USB
    psa]play 120 Nike USB
    SoundSpace 2 Nakamichi USB

    http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2172

    --
    A black hole is where God divided by 0
    1. Re:Why is this a big deal? by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The big deal is that Apple's not supporting iTunes interfacing with the Pre. The support is coming from Pre's side. Your post says:

      iTunes currently supports about 20 non-iPod devices

      The big deal is that it seems as if Apple decides what gets supported and what doesn't. It should be built so that any device maker can choose whether or not to build an adapter so that their hardware can interface with iTunes? Where does this leave iRiver, Archos, Sandisk, Microsoft, Centon, Nextar, etc?

      Apple decides who lives and who dies. That's the big deal.

      --
      My work here is dung.
    2. Re:Why is this a big deal? by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      How old is that list? Those products are ancient. SONICBlue went bankrupt in 2003!

      Also, IIRC, the 3rd-party players could only sync with the Mac version of iTunes. I wouldn't be surprised if the support has been removed entirely, given that I sincerely doubt people are still using those players (some of which hold as little as 32MB!)

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    3. Re:Why is this a big deal? by yali · · Score: 0

      From your link:

      only iPod can play AAC Protected songs

      That's the big deal.

    4. Re:Why is this a big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Nokia has been syncing with iTunes as log as I can remember. They have their own software and is very simple to do. it's not supported by Apple and in hasn't stopped working in the last 3 or so years.

    5. Re:Why is this a big deal? by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 5, Informative

      Those are legacy devices, pre-dating the iPod, from the time when iTunes was just a music management application (originally called SoundJam MP) and not the lynchpin of Apple's vertical monopoly entertainment strategy.

      None of those devices are supported on iTunes for Windows.

    6. Re:Why is this a big deal? by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      That's the big deal.

      That was not Apple's fault. Without protected AAC's, Apple would not have had a lot of that music to sell in the first place. If you want to blame somebody for DRM, blame the music business. Now that iTunes is almost 100% iTunes Plus non-DRM'd files, even that's not a "big deal".

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    7. Re:Why is this a big deal? by nine-times · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not a huge deal, considering Apple doesn't sell AAC Protected songs anymore.

    8. Re:Why is this a big deal? by Moridineas · · Score: 0, Redundant

      That's the big deal.

      Why is that a big deal? I don't think apple even SELLS protected aac songs anymore?

    9. Re:Why is this a big deal? by rodrigoandrade · · Score: 1

      Troll???? He's absolutely right.

    10. Re:Why is this a big deal? by PrescriptionWarning · · Score: 1

      well it is a big deal for folks like a friend of mine who have already bought quite a lot of the protected AACs, and now being told they have to pay more money to "unlock" them. What a load of crap, they should offer redownload for free once a DRM free version is available for those same songs (unless they already do that, in which case i'm haplessly unable to be up with the times)

    11. Re:Why is this a big deal? by InlawBiker · · Score: 1

      I was surprised to find that my Blackberry 8820 also syncs with iTunes. In fact, if you want to sync music on your Blackberry it requires iTunes, via the Blackberry Desktop software. I was also surprised to find that the Blackberry is a reasonably good media player.

      I don't see why Apple would care too much if Palm did the same thing. More users of iTunes means more potential music buyers.

    12. Re:Why is this a big deal? by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's not so simple as that. What you call an "unlock" gets you double the bit rate too. A workaround that Apple execs have talked about publicly is that you burn it to CD and rip it back. If you're not at all interested in doubling the bit rate, the small amount of loss in re-encoding probably isn't going to be a big deal.

      We can talk about coulda woulda shoulda, but I doubt Apple is the main problem here. If the RIAA is involved in the mix, I think the RIAA should get the lion's share of the blame if it doesn't go the way you think it should.

    13. Re:Why is this a big deal? by Rob+Y. · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The big deal is that Apple's not supporting iTunes interfacing with the Pre. The support is coming from Pre's side.

      If that's true, then the Pre could emulate one of the non-ipod devices and sync to iTunes. Can Apple sue Palm for emulating a Rio? Possibly, I guess, if Rio's paying royalties for the privilege of syncing to iTunes...

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    14. Re:Why is this a big deal? by scubamage · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Caveat emptor.

    15. Re:Why is this a big deal? by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1

      Free? Hahaha. Why voluntarily miss out on a revenue opportunity? You can unlock your tunes, for 30c a track.

    16. Re:Why is this a big deal? by Own3d-You · · Score: 1

      How does apple decide who lives and dies? If your device doesn't sync with iTunes, use a different player. It's really not that hard.

    17. Re:Why is this a big deal? by AioKits · · Score: 3, Funny

      What, no Zune support? *duck!*

      --
      "Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted." -Groucho Marx
    18. Re:Why is this a big deal? by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      well it is a big deal for folks like a friend of mine who have already bought quite a lot of the protected AACs, and now being told they have to pay more money to "unlock" them.

      I can't understand how that's possibly true.

      Everybody--presumably including your "friend"--who bought from the iTunes store over the past 6-7 years knew exactly what they were getting. Copy protected songs that they could play on their itunes and on their ipod. They have not LOST any freedom from this arrangement--indeed, Apple has increased the number of usages per file over the year.

      Apple just now offers higher quality songs without the DRM. It's a new product if you will. Yeah, it kinda sucks that I chose to buy a bunch of songs for a $1 instead of buying a CD, but I'm not losing that much sleep over upgrading the ones I actually want for 30 cents each.

      So, in conclusion--your "friend" could NEVER play songs on a device other than an ipod/iphone. Nothing has changed. Therefore, why is it suddenly a big deal?

    19. Re:Why is this a big deal? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Apple decides who lives and who dies. That's the big deal.

      Just like with their OS. Except for me and my hackintosh ;-)

    20. Re:Why is this a big deal? by nxtw · · Score: 1

      That list, which is old, represents the 3rd party plugins which are bundled with iTunes by default. The SDK allows anyone to develop their own plugin.

      I am not aware of any SDK that allows prorgrammers to develop an actual sync plugin for iTunes. Many applications use the iTunes COM/AppleScript interfaces to access iTunes library information and provide their own sync implementation. A real iTunes plugin would mean that third-party devices would appear in iTunes when plugged in and users would have the same interface as seen by Apple devices (according to the features supported by that device.)

    21. Re:Why is this a big deal? by MacAnkka · · Score: 1

      I don't know about windows, but at least on a Mac the Nokia Media Transfer application is far from being as usable as iTunes+iPod. You have to make a playlist for iTunes that is named specifically, put the music you want to sync in to it and then the seperate Nokia Media Transfer application uses some AppleScript magic to copy the files to the phone. It's very cumbersome and after a few tries with it, I've ended up just copying the music manually from the library to the phone with Finder. Using the Nokia way, it always feels like something could break down any minute.

    22. Re:Why is this a big deal? by norminator · · Score: 1

      I don't see why Apple would care too much if Palm did the same thing. More users of iTunes means more potential music buyers.

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure Apple makes more money off of iPhone/iPod sales than it makes from selling music (for the average customer). Not to mention the Pre has hooks into the Amazon music store, whereas the iPhone connects directly to the iTunes store, which means that even though the Pre will sync with iTunes, Pre owners still have a convenient option to buy elsewhere, so the Pre not only means zero revenue from the purchase of the phone, but most likely fewer iTunes tracks sold as well. The Blackberry, being primarily a business device, doesn't compete as directly with the iPhone as the Pre will.

      Also, I think the biggest issue here is that the Pre masquerades as an iPod in iTunes. I'm assuming other 3rd party players show up as 3rd party players and not as iPods.

    23. Re:Why is this a big deal? by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Wait a sec, you are complaining that Apple is only supporting 20 players by other manufacturers and that the fact it doesn't support a player that isn't out yet is prove they are monopolistic? Fuck you.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    24. Re:Why is this a big deal? by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

      The Nike psa]play devices came out after the iPod. They came out in 2002, iPod came out in 2001.

      --
      http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    25. Re:Why is this a big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The big deal is that it seems as if Apple decides what gets supported and what doesn't. It should be built so that any device maker can choose whether or not to build an adapter so that their hardware can interface with iTunes? Where does this leave iRiver, Archos, Sandisk, Microsoft, Centon, Nextar, etc? Apple decides who lives and who dies. That's the big deal.

      The crappy software that came with my logitech mouse doesn't work with any other mouse, yet you don't see anyone bitching. If iRiver, et al want in on iTunes, they can ask Apple nicely like Creative Labs and the others that are now supported. It's called DOING BUSINESS. You don't just scream monopoly and kick sand around the sandbox when the other kids don't do exactly as you say. And if iRiver et al can't work out a deal, well they work fine with Amazon and Windows Media Player, or they can just go make their own music service. Apple isn't preventing anyone from selling music, Amazon is proof of that. If anyone is living or dying it probably has a lot more to do with a faulty business plan than to do with Apple.

    26. Re:Why is this a big deal? by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the correct response be to use a different _store_, and not a different player?

      Hell, I'm only buying 256+kbps MP3s from 7Digital and Amazon until Apple gets off their ass and offers lossless music on iTunes. The rest gets ripped in FLAC, right off a CD...

      Then again, if you _need_ syncing capabilities (i.e. are too lazy to drag & drop new songs onto your PMP), you probably deserve to be locked into Apple's scheme...

    27. Re:Why is this a big deal? by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      I should probably add that the reason the iTunes store curently annoys me is their AAC format - if you're going to offer only lossy downloads, at least do it in a format that nobody has to transcode to a different lossy format. As if Alt Preset Standard would have been too much to ask for...

    28. Re:Why is this a big deal? by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      It's very cumbersome and after a few tries with it, I've ended up just copying the music manually from the library to the phone with Finder. Using the Nokia way, it always feels like something could break down any minute.

      That works with just about any device BTW, just drag and drop to the mounted drive. Funny that the same people complaining that you can't fill an iPod that way are the ones complaining that you can easily do that from iTunes.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  5. iTunes Has Always Supported Other Players by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 5, Informative

    They are even documented on Apple's website. I'm not sure why it's a surprise that the Pre is also going to be able to sync with iTunes.

    1. Re:iTunes Has Always Supported Other Players by brennanw · · Score: 1

      Because the Pre is a phone, I guess. But I agree -- it doesn't seem that big a deal to me.

      --
      Eviscerati.Org: All Hail the Eviscerati
    2. Re:iTunes Has Always Supported Other Players by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Because it has additional functionality not even available to Apple products.

      Wireless syncing with iTunes puts the Palm Pre ahead of the mighty iPhone in terms of functionality. While this alone isn't a huge deal.

      The big deal will be how Apple reacts. Specifically, if Apple intentionally cripples the Palm's unique functionality to create an artificial advantage for the iPhone.

    3. Re:iTunes Has Always Supported Other Players by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Dude, that document is obsolete and only covers the Mac version of Itunes

    4. Re:iTunes Has Always Supported Other Players by FooMasterZero · · Score: 1

      Its my understanding that it works by telling itunes it's an ipod as opposed to a pre device. Personally i think the pre should be able to sync with itunes as other devices have been able to. However I do not like the idea of the pre screwing around with the USB vendor and device ids to make this work, this to me is fraud and is not good behavior on any hardware or software vendor in my opinion. Which again is my understanding of how the pre actually does the syncing. As per the parent they should read the available API's and work with apple, cause after all more pre users = more apple/itunes (movie,music,*) store users ?

    5. Re:iTunes Has Always Supported Other Players by gad_zuki! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why is this fraud? It should be fraudulent to block other players from accessing my software.

      Its really incredible how people instinctively side with bad corporate policies. How about my rights as a consumer? How about the right to tinker? How about educating people about Apple's horrible policies?

      I see nothing wrong with this. I hope its a wake up call to the industry and I hope it shows all the apple fanboys whats wrong with their favorite company.

    6. Re:iTunes Has Always Supported Other Players by FooMasterZero · · Score: 1

      I actually agree with you as far as consumer rights and the right to tinker. I am just saying if anything represents itself as something that is not than that is where i say it is fraud or at the very least mis-representation is all. Nothing like other device manufacturers doing the same trick then it becomes an endless cat and mouse game where no one really wins because everything is lying about who they are or what they do just to work with some service or system. iTunes yes should be the responsible party in all of this and realize the market they have the means to let other devices and services play in a way where they not forced to 'fake it'

    7. Re:iTunes Has Always Supported Other Players by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      The big deal will be how Apple reacts. Specifically, if Apple intentionally cripples the Palm's unique functionality to create an artificial advantage for the iPhone.

      So what will happen if Apple does Jack Shit?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    8. Re:iTunes Has Always Supported Other Players by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called emulation.

      My Brother printer can emulate various IBM, HP, and epson printers, even going so far as driver compatibility. So what's the problem?

      Oh right, Steve Jobs hasn't personally blessed the Pre.

  6. I can see an iTunes update in your future. by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Honestly, who bases a whole product line on a "faking out" feature.
    I'm no fan of DRM, and wish iTunes was more open to other devices, but to publish a whole iPhone "killer" on a kludge is just asking for trouble.

    WTF are consumers going to do when Apple pushes an update that breaks this (intentionally, or not) and all of a sudden this marvelous sync stops working?

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
    1. Re:I can see an iTunes update in your future. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So they break existing communications to third party devices to block competition. Ooh, can anyone else see a lawsuit coming. US may take it up the arse, but Europe will be watching very closely. After all, Apple regularly tout they are 95% of online music sales, that's as big as Microsoft's monopoly.

    2. Re:I can see an iTunes update in your future. by areusche · · Score: 1

      Palm or its user community will probably publish its own update to circumvent Apple's lock out. The older Palm OS community was pretty hard core in getting OS 5 working incredibly well. I see no reason for them (with due time) be able to work WebOS as they did OS 5.

    3. Re:I can see an iTunes update in your future. by AnalPerfume · · Score: 1

      I wonder too if Apple have some patents tucked away under a sofa somewhere they could bring out to demand hefty fees for permission to sync with their stuff.

    4. Re:I can see an iTunes update in your future. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Honestly, who bases a whole product line on a "faking out" feature.

      Your question seems to be missing its mark, both literally and figuratively. No one, except some knockoffs possibly, bases a product line on "fake out". It's not like Palm is billing the Pre as The Palm iPod, what they're doing is selling a phone with an incredibly interesting looking new OS that features some of the most open software development seen to date on a smartphone. Oh, and by the way, you can get your music on there if you've got some of those EmPeeThree tracks in your iTunes.

      It's in Palms interest to push the bar in terms of what is expected of non-Apple smartphones. Apple has performed so well that they they have arguably dictated the feature set customers now expect in a smartphone, and one of those features is having your music on the device. Beyond that, Apple has also been wildly successful in the digital music business to the tune of maintaining over "70 percent market share of legal music downloads" (ITunes Store).

      We're in a situation where one company is in control of both the music you get and the device you want to listen to it on. Why wouldn't Palm make a ballsy move like this and try to force their competitor into an anti-competitive position. As was described elsewhere, this is win-win for them. Either they get iTunes integration or they hurt Apple's mindshare by forcing them into a bad position.

    5. Re:I can see an iTunes update in your future. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 0

      If palm didn't kill the community, you might have a point.

    6. Re:I can see an iTunes update in your future. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can also do OTA updates (according to the Palm demo at All Things Digital that was liveblogged on Engadget). So, if Apple does break it, they may be able to push an update before many people even realize there is a problem. Well, at least based on my workflow. I only sync my iPhone when I need to add new podcasts since I have everything push syncing OTA. So, I usually only sync once per week. With the Pre, contacts sync from the cloud, so daily syncing shouldn't be needed.

    7. Re:I can see an iTunes update in your future. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      palm canceled a meeting because an idiot violated the NDA he was under. this will have no impact on the amount of people developing for their new OS. nice FUD, though.

      the community refers to more that the self-aggrandizing idiots that made that blog post that was turned into a /. "article". the community is all of the people who will develop for the new palm OS. which, since the Pre doesn't have to be hacked to run unsigned code, will probably be quite a lot.

    8. Re:I can see an iTunes update in your future. by bendodge · · Score: 1

      If the fake is good enough, it will break real iPods too. Then Apple would have to release an update for the iPod and iTunes, and probably delay in between, at which time Palm updates the Pre. Essentially an arms race. Palm would probably be locked out at times, but if Palm is diligent it should work pretty well. They'd have an advantage in that a smartphone can be updated at anytime, vs an regular iPod which must be connected to a PC.

      --
      The government can't save you.
    9. Re:I can see an iTunes update in your future. by ifrag · · Score: 1

      WTF are consumers going to do when Apple pushes an update that breaks this (intentionally, or not) and all of a sudden this marvelous sync stops working?

      I'm sure that will go over well, since that's equivalent to also killing legacy iPod support along with it. If Palm did their job right then the thing will not be distinguishable from a real iPod. If their implementation is good enough Apple's only recourse is going to be legal, not technical.

      --
      Fear is the mind killer.
    10. Re:I can see an iTunes update in your future. by saleenS281 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if you noticed, but the Palm Pre is a cellphone. It is not "based" in a fashion on iTunes sync capabilities. It's just another nice feature to have. If apple breaks it, it will be fixed again. If Apple continues to break it, I'm sure there will likely be a lawsuit... because, as has been quoted many times before, that sort of thing is frowned upon by the courts per the Clatyon act.

      http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6538

    11. Re:I can see an iTunes update in your future. by tepples · · Score: 1

      Honestly, who bases a whole product line on a "faking out" feature.

      Tengen, Camerica, and Color Dreams did so at some point in the Nintendo Entertainment System's life cycle. The NES had a CIC (security chip) such that only Game Paks manufactured by Nintendo with a matching CIC could run. Unlicensed games would emulate (Tengen) or freeze (Camerica/Color Dreams) the CIC to get the game started. Their unlicensed status was due to cost concerns (Nintendo charged roughly 20 percent of MSRP for each CIC) or censorship concerns (Color Dreams's Wisdom Tree label wanted to sell games with overt Christian themes, but Nintendo didn't want any part of this). Datel and a bunch of other companies making cheat or homebrew devices did the same on later consoles.

    12. Re:I can see an iTunes update in your future. by larry+bagina · · Score: 1
      Except it's not a monopoly.

      The exclusive power, or privilege of selling a commodity; the exclusive power, right, or privilege of dealing in some article, or of trading in some market; sole command of the traffic in anything, however obtained; as, the proprietor of a patented article is given a monopoly of its sale for a limited time; chartered trading companies have sometimes had a monopoly of trade with remote regions; a combination of traders may get a monopoly of a particular product.

      There are other online music stores selling the same exact music.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    13. Re:I can see an iTunes update in your future. by samcan · · Score: 1

      Open source products hack together support for file formats all the time.

      Microsoft didn't just willingly hand over the file format specs for Office documents to the OpenOffice.org team. Rather, they reverse-engineered support. Microsoft could have released updates to Office to change the file format, but that would have probably resulted in media backlash when files from one version of Office 2003 couldn't be read by another.

      At least, I think this is similar. Perhaps I'm wrong.

  7. Option 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Or Apple could realize that the iTunes store is BIG money and AT&T does not cover the whole US with their network and let Palm sync music. Music people paid Apple to download. Apple has other issues to tackle rather than worrying about a marginalized company like Palm giving it free advertising while encouraging people to buy even more music from Apple. Heck, Apple might even lend an engineer to Palm so that there is less faking and more playing on Apple's terms. It has happened before. Probably be some lawyer rattling for Wall St. but so long as Apple is keeping its head low to avoid anti-trust lawsuits and Palm doesn't look like they are going to become a major player, Apple might just let let this one slide.

    1. Re:Option 2 by penguinstorm · · Score: 1

      err....yeah...ok anony-boy. Sorry. Your comments more or less echo some ones I made below, which I posed before I read your post.

      My apologies.

      --
      Skot Nelson music is my saviour / i was maimed by rock and roll
    2. Re:Option 2 by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      1) the iTunes store is not big money. Napster, Wal*Mart, Microsoft, Real, Sony, etc. are all struggling or gave up. The RIAA/labels take 70%. iTMS eeks out a small profit, but it wouldn't exist if not for iPods.

      2) Palm isn't syncing with iTunes because they can't write their own sync software (on second thought, their syncing software does suck). They're syncing with iTunes because most people who might buy a pre already own an ipod or three. The extra market share from palm pre owners is probably on par with the extra market share from a linux client.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  8. So...? by nine-times · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is this really such a "big fat middle finger"? It's cementing iTunes as the default player and iTMS as the default music store, and putting Palm in the position of trying to pick up some of Apple's leftovers. Plus, if Apple doesn't like it, they can issue firmware updates and update iTunes, making everything connect some slightly different way, and suddenly Palm's stuff stops working.

    If Palm really wanted to make trouble for Apple, they'd make their own alternative to iTunes, which wouldn't take much work. If they really didn't want to do it from scratch, I'm sure there are even some open source projects that could be used as a jumping-off point. And if they didn't want to make their own music store, they could probably strike a deal with Amazon. Now that would be a problem for Apple.

    1. Re:So...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure it's cementing iTunes as the default player, as much as it is taking away excuses for people to not buy non-Apple blessed products.

      iTMS is big money for Apple, but so are iPods. Take one or the other away and you break Apple's vice grip.

      I hate iTunes, I think it's one of the worst Music management and playing tools out there, but I do have an iPhone and two iPods so I'm stuck with iTunes.

      It would be sweet if Pre found a way to integrate with every other music store out there (amazon, napster, etc) on the device without even connecting to a PC.
      That is one of the nice features of the iPhone, you can be on the road, browse iTMS for a song or album, buy it right there and download it over 3G.

    2. Re:So...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Apple can't just publish an update that makes Pre stop working. If Pre is pretending to be an iPod, then all iPods would also stop working.

      The only hope is to find something that Pre does slightly differently than a real iPod and try to base a block on that. But blocking things in that way only lasts a short time until Palm would update the Pre.

      Furthermore, the block could prevent other MP3 players that iTunes already supports from working properly (Apple officially supports players other than iPods).

    3. Re:So...? by Yaztromo · · Score: 1

      Apple can't just publish an update that makes Pre stop working. If Pre is pretending to be an iPod, then all iPods would also stop working.

      Unless, of course, Apple also pushes iPod firmware updates for every iPod model ever made through iTunes as well, such that synchronization requires some cryptographic authentication to proceed. Even the first generation iPods should be able to handle this.

      I doubt that technical feasibility is any significant barrier for Apple to do this; what I really don't see is why they'd want to. It wouldn't be the first time iTunes has synchronized with non-Apple hardware, and it would only increase the market for their online services. Apple doesn't have anything to lose by having the Pre interface with iTunes, so why prevent it?

      Yaz.

    4. Re:So...? by homesnatch · · Score: 1

      iTunes update including iPod firmware update should do the trick.

    5. Re:So...? by wed128 · · Score: 1

      Is there really no non-itunes way of managing music on an ipod? no wifi? less space than a nomad? lame.

  9. Best news all day by docbrody · · Score: 1

    Well this knocks off one of the major reasons I was hesitating on getting the Pre. And lets not just assume Apple will sue. As others have pointed out, Apple does allow other players. But will movies and TV shows work? (no they are drm protected). Guess I'll have to rely on the Sling app for the Pre, or hopefully a hulu solution.

    1. Re:Best news all day by Xest · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what Apple could actually sue for. AFAIK reverse engineering for the purpose of producing a compatible product is actually one of the get-out clauses for cracking DRM under the DMCA. Another is educational research I believe.

      I'm not sure they're actually doing anything illegal - look at the Psystar case, the best Apple could come up with was breaking the EULA.

    2. Re:Best news all day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at Psystar... they are bankrupt and out of business.

      Apple succeeded in its objective. They didn't have to win, just run them out of funds.

    3. Re:Best news all day by Xest · · Score: 1

      The difference is Palm is a billion dollar company whilst Psystar was a startup.

      Palm has enough to see lawsuits through.

  10. If history is a guide,Apple will easily break this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    If experience with palm os on my trusty handspring is guide, Apple will be able to break this easily. Palm's USB driver was a total joke. The hotsync would regularly blue-screen windows in a multi-core or even hyperthreaded environment unless you forced affinity on the hotsync.exe. And they never fixed it. They couldn't even cope with seeing more than one core in a usb driver. One of the few apps I ever saw that could blue-screen windows.

    And they only recently supplied drivers that worked under vista. And the still haven't released an x64 version.

    Soured me on Palm forever. And proved their driver's dept sucks.

  11. But... by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Will Amarok 1.4 work with the Pre?
    I would love to have a Smart Phone that works well with Linux.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:But... by Ingenium13 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Will Amarok 1.4 work with the Pre? I would love to have a Smart Phone that works well with Linux.

      I would imagine it would. It simply shows up as a mass media device, where you can just copy MP3s over to it and they show up in the media library. This is the same way a lot of other MP3 players work, so it should be trivial to get Amarok support

    2. Re:But... by MikeBabcock · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Amarok 1.4 works with every other MP3 player I've tried it with ... so I don't see why not.

      I'd much rather use Amarok than iTunes.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    3. Re:But... by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Well it would be cool of it detected when I connected to the USB and would sync automaticly. I really don't hate iTunes but I hate rebooting into windows to sync my ipod touch.
      Of course the other thing I really want is for it sync my calendar and contacts.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    4. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would assume so, amarok syncs with just about anything anyways, but palm has pretty decent linux support for all their phones, my palm centro sync's painlessly with my box.

    5. Re:But... by dave420 · · Score: 1

      I'd rather use a media player that doesn't look like some sort of widget explosion on my screen :-P

    6. Re:But... by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      I've never used a more slick and easy to use media player than Amarok, and I go back to XMMS and many others before it.

      Amarok 1.4 is easy to use, fast, intelligent, stable and extensible with good theming support and the ability to run as a tiny desktop widget or a big feature-filled iTunes-killing music browser.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
  12. Re:Palm? by bobmarleypeople · · Score: 3, Informative

    As much as I'd like to mark you as flamebait, you actually have a point. Until the Palm Pre was announced, I was under the impression that Palm (as a company) had gone under. When looking to replace my faithful HP iPAQ h5550 PDA (god that was an awesome PDA) I asked around in the electronics shops about a palm device, the majority thought they didn't exist any more. So it's nice to see they've been working on something over the past few years (unlike the Duke Nukem Forever guys).

  13. Re:If history is a guide,Apple will easily break t by SethJohnson · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The hotsync would regularly blue-screen windows in a multi-core or even hyperthreaded environment unless you forced affinity on the hotsync.exe.

    Is this a problem with the driver, sync app, or OS? Honestly, I would wonder why my OS couldn't protect itself from something going on with USB.

    Seth

  14. Speculation by jav1231 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Pure speculation here but what if during that whole patent debate that Palm and Apple had regarding touch technology Apple conceded to let the Pre sync? Just a thought.

    I mean I'm sure Apple told Palm, "Hey, you can't use multi-touch or anything like it."
    So Palm said, "Oh yeah? Browse our portfolio. We've highlighted a number of patents the iPod, Touch, and iPhone clearly violate."
    Apple: "Cross License?"
    Palm: "Sure! Oh, and we want to sync to iTunes."

    1. Re:Speculation by zullnero · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Very possibly. Apple's people internally have been crying foul about this stuff, and they've been whining about their talent drain following Jon Rubenstein over to Palm for awhile now. It seems a lot of the guys who were inside at Apple during their big turnaround put their loyalties with Rubenstein rather than Jobs or the other corporate types that are really running Apple these days. Apple did the same thing a few years ago when they stripped Palmsource of all the developers they could find to make the iPhone, and had been pulling away top guys from Palm even before that when they were creating the iPod.

      Is anyone really surprised that Apple's gone evil? Listen to the rhetoric. Apple, with every passing day, has been acting more and more hardline and closed to competition than even Microsoft. Apple fanboys are sounding off the same soundbites that the Microsoft guys did years ago about Linux.

      The truth is that Apple doesn't want just anyone buying music from their near monopoly on pay music downloads(which, coincedentally, was helped to become a monopoly by Bono of U2, who also just so happens to be a member of Elevation Partners, one of the major shareholders in Palm). They only want the "approved" companies that swear not to actually compete with them to work with their stuff. This is the type of thinking that sent Apple down the tubes back in the late 80's/early 90's.

  15. Coming soon.... by AdmiralXyz · · Score: 5, Funny

    iTunes 8.1.2, "fixes syncing issues"

    --
    Dislike the Electoral College? Lobby your state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
    1. Re:Coming soon.... by amasiancrasian · · Score: 1

      +1 Funny

      In all honesty, I can't see Apple pushing out an update to iTunes just to break syncing functionality with Pre. Aside from the fact that Apple alumni engineers developed the method of syncing, any update to iTunes could also break legacy support for older iPods.

      Apple is pretty aware of an entire jailbreak community for months, yet hardly do they push out an update just to break what they perceive an "exploit." Perhaps the only time they have willfully tried to stop jailbreaking was the iPhone 1.1.2 update, but since the backlash of that surfaced to public media, they have relented. Although jailbreaking depends on a hardware exploit (which makes it harder to fix), Apple usually simply ignores the behavior, especially if it is one that would result in negative backlash.

      My guess is that since they also support other players and want to avoid being seen as walking in Microsoft's footsteps, they will avoid making this an issue. It will probably be unlikely, but they may even list it as a supported music device in the knowledge base. Apple would be wise to avoid garnering a backlash, and even touch on anti-competitive practices.

  16. PALM PRE OMG by bonch · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I'm so damn tired of reading about the Palm Pre. It's everywhere, and it's annoying.

    1. Re:PALM PRE OMG by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm so damn tired of reading about the Palm Pre. It's everywhere, and it's annoying.

      Unlike the iPhone, which is hardly ever mentioned in the media...

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:PALM PRE OMG by bonch · · Score: 1

      Is that supposed to justify it?

    3. Re:PALM PRE OMG by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      I've never heard of it before.

  17. Blackberries already can sync from iTunes by new+death+barbie · · Score: 1

    ...apparently (http://na.blackberry.com/eng/services/media/mediasync.jsp).

    Granted, they use a separate app, but if I could control my music and media with iTunes and listen to it on my BB, that'd be good enough for me.

    --

    It's supposed to be completely automatic, but actually you have to press this button.

  18. big fat what? by markringen · · Score: 1

    big fat middle finger? i don't think apple is much worried about it. it's more like pulling apple's finger, and apple farting a bit and saying excellent. my friends response: the Palm what? or do they still exist? this is the general response i get from people in Europe and Asia. as far as i am concerned Palm is going the way of the dodo.

  19. Re:If history is a guide,Apple will easily break t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Problem with the driver. Windows drivers are low level, you screw something up there, everything goes down (BSOD).

  20. Why go the legal route? by penguinstorm · · Score: 1

    Why would Apple go the legal route?

    Just block the damn device. When iSync my Gen 4 iPod iTunes knows it's a Gen 4 iPod. When I sync my shuffle, it knows it's a shuffle.

    When I sync my Pre, it will know it's a Pre.

    So just rev itunes to block it.

    Or not, and just walk around acting like you're not scared. Frankly, I think the Pre is roughly the equivalent of pulling your goalie in the final minutes of your final playoff game when you're behind: a last ditch effort. Palm may well just die as a result, and maybe Apple should do nothing for a while and see what happens.

    As an aside, I'm not sure why everybody thinks this is new. Diamond Rio players used to mount in iTunes and you could sync playlists. I have a Nike PSA Play sitting in a drawer that I bought in 1998 that did this. It stores...96MB of music thanks to the MMC expansion card I bought (not compatible with SD.) Woo hoo!

    --
    Skot Nelson music is my saviour / i was maimed by rock and roll
    1. Re:Why go the legal route? by iluvcapra · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just block the damn device. When iSync my Gen 4 iPod iTunes knows it's a Gen 4 iPod. When I sync my shuffle, it knows it's a shuffle.

      DVD Jon agrees with your appraisal of the situation.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    2. Re:Why go the legal route? by StreetStealth · · Score: 3, Informative

      When I sync my Pre, it will know it's a Pre.

      No, it won't. Think about it for a moment and you'll realize why.

      iTunes knows which version or revision of iPod is connected because Apple has prepared iTunes to recognize each one -- first-party software recognizes first-party hardware. The icons are all stored inside the iTunes binary, and it's only relying on an identifier from a list of possible iPods it knows of (thus the software update after each iPod release).

      Most likely, the Pre is presenting itself to iTunes as a 4th gen iPod, something that iTunes has to support and for which there is a lot of reverse-engineering work already out in in the hackersphere.

      --
      Your mind is clear / The things that you fear / Will fade with how much you / Believe what you hear
    3. Re:Why go the legal route? by penguinstorm · · Score: 1

      > Most likely, the Pre is presenting itself to iTunes as a 4th gen iPod

      Agreed, though I'm quite sure that they can overcome that /should they choose too./

      I'm not going to speculate on the specifics since I don't have in depth hardware knowledge.

      Anyway, if I were Steve Jobs I'd take the "walk around with a swagger in your step" approach personally. At least for a while. Apple is the undisputed king digital music right now. My approach would be to act as such: keep a close eye on all potential threats, but don't start acting like a dictator and lopping their heads off too soon. If Palm actually gains enough market share and starts to look like any kind of threat, a course of action can be undertaken at that time.

      --
      Skot Nelson music is my saviour / i was maimed by rock and roll
  21. Except for... by nobodyman · · Score: 4, Informative

    The iTunes store is almost entirely DRM-free by now.

    Except for movies. And TV shows. And audiobooks. Oh, and applications.

    But yeah, besides those things, *totally* DRM free.

  22. Automagic should be voted worst word of the year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously its not like Merlin waits around your computer and waves a wand to make it work.

  23. Pocket Tunes by peterpan79 · · Score: 1

    The commercial software pocket tunes (http://www.pocket-tunes.com/) supports iTunes - Palm Sync for the models

    Palm Centro
    Palm T|X
    Palm Treo 650
    Palm Treo 680
    Palm Treo 700p
    Palm Treo 755p

    and also for Windows Mobile. So it cannot be that hard to implement this for the new palm models..

  24. Anyone can do this and many have by macslut · · Score: 5, Informative

    That list, which is old, represents the 3rd party plugins which are bundled with iTunes by default. The SDK allows anyone to develop their own plugin. As someone else mentioned, Nokia has done this a long time ago. This could not be any more of a non-story. It's really bad reporting. It would've been more interesting to me if they had said that Palm made the Pre so that it could *not* sync music with iTunes. And the headline is incredibly misleading...it won't sync DRM music people may have in their libraries, and it won't sync movies, tv shows and most importantly apps purchased from iTunes. "This fight just got a lot more interesting." (sigh)

    1. Re:Anyone can do this and many have by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      getting the device plugin api require signing an nda. presumably apple will deny applicants that it doesn't trust (i would guess palm is on that list).

    2. Re:Anyone can do this and many have by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Apple doesn't seem to mention this on their website - the only available SDKs for iTunes are for the Windows COM interface and visualisations. Neither of which allows for presenting a device to iTunes to use.

  25. Not that hard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not all that hard to do when you control the software on the device:
    http://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2009/03/14/rockboxitunes/

  26. Thanks to a team of ex-Apple engineers by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Funny

    and soon to be ex-Palm engineers.

    Palm exec: I thank you for all your effort in giving us the inside scoop on how Apple work. No I will have to fire you because you have shown yourself to not be a trust full person and we have no confidence that you will honor our NDA, as you have shown not to honor your previous employer.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Thanks to a team of ex-Apple engineers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the "ex-Apple" engineers went to Palm around the time the Apple Newton got axed in the mid-90's. Pretty sure Palm's been diligent about not violating any NDAs if they're taking Apple head-on.

      Also, it's not like you really need inside information to reverse engineer the iPod. It's been done before.

  27. The money is in iTunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The money isn't in the iPhone or iPod, but it's in iTune. Don't get me wrong, making a bit of profit from selling the hardware is nice, but Apple really makes it money in the "supporting" side of the equation.

    Think of it this way, for each iPod or iPhone, apple say makes $20 after all costs (development, support, etc) are assumed. They sell 4 million of these units and make a whopping $80 million dollars. That's chump change. If in 3 years of owning the iPhone or iPod, you download say about 2 dozen cheap games giving them say about $1 each, a few CDs worth of music, say about 50 songs where they make about $30 total. The iPhones and iPod make them about $208 million. This doesn't take into account any liability of a battery exploding, etc. Music/movie files have a low overhead and a low liability issue. they even duck the issue on apps as they are only a distribution service.

    So if some hardware manufacturer wants to connect to iTunes, I seriously doubt Apple will give them much fuss so long as
    1) They don't besmirch the Apple name
    2) Apple makes a profit from them connecting to iTunes
    3) They don't use any Apple IP in their product.

    1. Re:The money is in iTunes by penguinstorm · · Score: 1

      > The money isn't in the iPhone or iPod, but it's in iTune.

      The Steve claimed otherwise, though I can't find the reference which effectively makes this comment completely useless. He basically said the store covers its own costs, but fundamentally it's a way to sell iPods.

      I'm not saying I believe him. I'm just saying he said it...at some point...somewhere....that I can't find in google....blurg.

      --
      Skot Nelson music is my saviour / i was maimed by rock and roll
  28. Amusing... by Maury+Markowitz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I find it more than a little ironic that before this item became news all the Pre supporters were saying iTunes was craptastic and claiming the lack of syncing on the Pre as a feature. Everything's in "the cloud", so who needs desktop tethering?

    Ahhh, but now that it syncs with iTunes, suddenly Palm is super-genius for supporting and iTunes support is [i]obviously[/i] a major selling point.

    Whatever. When Apple blocks it and it doesn't sync, I'm sure syncing will suddenly not be important again.

  29. Re:Palm? by v1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They were on the verge because PalmOS is crap and Palm Desktop is steaming crap, and they both look rosey compared to palm's technical support.

    I just threw away my T2 and got a touch, and love it. From repeated bad experiences of my own and almost everyone I know with palm, I hope apple reams them good, give them a twist for me while you're at it.

    Too little, too late, palm.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  30. Re:If history is a guide,Apple will easily break t by geekboy642 · · Score: 1

    That, though, is a design flaw common to everything that doesn't use a microkernel. Even linux suffers from this problem, despite the continuing efforts of microkernel enthusiasts. Some day I'd like to see a mainstream OS with a kernel that can't be crashed by a driver, because I want to look back on this as the "bad old days".

    --
    Just another "DOJ fascist authoritarian totalitarian bootlicker" -- Zeio
  31. Re:Why is this story displayed red? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, hot and fresh, right off the grill.

  32. How about... let's sync with Palm Desktop by argent · · Score: 3, Informative

    To hell with iTunes, I just want to sync my Palm (my existing Palm) with Palm Desktop on my Macbook, without going through a third party product that wants to OWN my PDA.

    Back when I had Palm Desktop and Hotsync, I could sync my PDA with my office desktop and my home desktop and my laptop and everything Just Worked. Then I had to start syncing with Lorus Notes at the office, and tried two third paty syncing products, and the best I could manage was syncing with TWO computers. Then Palm gave up on Hotsync, and now I'm using Missing Sync and my PDA is tethered to my Macbook. Not only that, but I can't get it to sync notes at all.

    I don't know what I'll do when my current PDA finally dies. I never liked PDAs at all until I got a Palm, I tried a Pocket PC for a while and it screwed up my data... but even Palm doesn't support Palms any more.

  33. Locked down by the carrier by tepples · · Score: 1

    the community is all of the people who will develop for the new palm OS. which, since the Pre doesn't have to be hacked to run unsigned code, will probably be quite a lot.

    How long until the mobile phone network operators in the United States lock down execution of homemade apps as a condition of carrying the phone?

    1. Re:Locked down by the carrier by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      Do they do that for other phones, such as Windows Mobile based ones?

    2. Re:Locked down by the carrier by tepples · · Score: 1

      Do they do that for other phones, such as Windows Mobile based ones?

      Verizon does it for BREW phones, and the "best practice" installation of Symbian does it for S60 phones.

  34. Copyright is a government-granted monopoly by tepples · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So a market is "free" so long as the monopolies aren't "governmental".

    A monopoly is "governmental" if the monopolist uses the power of the state to maintain it, even if the monopolist is a business in the private sector. The DMCA anti-circumvention powers, like the other powers granted to copyright owners, are a government-granted monopoly. What monopolistic business methods were you thinking of that don't involve the power of the state?

  35. "AUTOMAGICALLY" by evel+aka+matt · · Score: 1

    IS NOT A FUCKING WORD.

    1. Re:"AUTOMAGICALLY" by Wraithlyn · · Score: 1

      But it's a property of your caps lock key?

      --
      "Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
    2. Re:"AUTOMAGICALLY" by dave420 · · Score: 1

      *BZZT!* It's a portmanteau word, actually.

  36. Re:Palm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >> palm's technical support

    >> I just threw away my T2 and got a touch, and love it

    Out of fire, and into the frying pan? I am sure you are loving it.

  37. Re:Why is this story displayed red? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and that's because iphone fanbois were still pondering over a possible comeback.

    itunes... meh...

  38. Re:If history is a guide,Apple will easily break t by lukas84 · · Score: 1

    Except your COULD write user mode USB drivers for Windows.

  39. These players are current,... by walter_f · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... aren't they? Not really.

    In fact, these - non-iPod - devices seem to have been out of production for nearly a decade now.

    I seem to recall that some of the mentioned players were current (and indeed, supported by iTunes 1.2 or so) in the days of Mac OS 9, circa 1999 or 2000, like the Nomad series by Creative and the Rio series by sonicBlue.

  40. Unleash the content MFers! by chord.wav · · Score: 1

    I'm all in favor of content unlocking. Companies should compete on better ways to handle the content. But the content itself, should be: unlocked, unDRMed and free as in speech, and as in beer.

  41. Re:If history is a guide,Apple will easily break t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I decided to never use Palm again once they decided to stop supporting the Treo 600 on OS X -- things eventually just stopped working as Apple updated their system and Palm didn't bother to keep up. Why risk buying a Pre when I think the support for the iPhone will be more reliable?

  42. Re:Palm? by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

    I just threw away my T2...

    I would have loved to have it.

  43. Re:Palm? by v1 · · Score: 1

    I am sure you are loving it.

    Actually I loved it so much (my 16) that I just replaced it with a new 32gb. Syncing that works, doesn't breed duplicate records in my addressbook constantly, contact pictures, can access my notes via www on any computer, can play my music and view my photos, free ssh and vnc clients, it just goes on and on, heck I don't even use 1/2 of the features and it just blows palmos out of the water at every single turn.

    Not to mention the stylus targeting on my T2 has been shifted 1/4" up for the last year and nobody has a fix. (it refused to recalibrate)

    Perhaps the biggest fear I have with palmos is when someone approaches me and asks for help with their palm. The usual story is it just stopped syncing a year ago for no reason. (this means their palm has a ton of new information entered on it that does not exist on their computer) Of course to help with this courts disaster because sometimes it will sync from palm to computer, sometimes it will sync from computer to palm, deleting whatever's there, and sometimes it will just resync everything and things start doubling. Or occasionally it will nuke an entire thing, on the palm AND the computer. The inability to back up anything on the PP before trying to fix the syncing makes my stomach turn. "OK, we get ONE shot at this. if it goes bad, you're going to lose everything on the palm. All we can do is back up your computer and restore the data if the palm nukes it all." What do you say to that?

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  44. Overhyped by wkcole · · Score: 1

    It has been possible to sync non-Apple devices with iTunes for non-DRM content for a long time, at least on the Mac side. Some devices have done it without extra software, hooking into iTunes' USB handling directly, others have used intermediary software. The former *sounds* nice, but when a device does more than play media and keep very simplified PIM info, iTunes isn't going to meet its users' needs. So then the vendor needs to write their own tools anyway, and it stops making much sense to have the device talk to iTunes directly, since the iTunes library information and media files are usable without iTunes and the PIM data that iTunes can sync is all accessible via SyncServices. That obviously differs on Windows, but surely it must have some sort of open-access PIM data sync system... (never touch the thing myself...) The only thing Palm seems to be doing that is really different is that apparently they've decided to go the route of mimicking an iPod: sending Apple's USB Vendor and Product ID's so that iTunes will think the Pre is an iPod. Not Wise.

  45. Re:Why is this story displayed red? by node+3 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does a red story mean that there are no comments?

    Not sure, but a read story means it's winter in hell.

  46. throw me in the briar patch by vaporland · · Score: 4, Informative

    What exactly is the threat to Apple? It works with iTunes? So? I used to own a TDK MP3 player that also worked with iTunes. People forget that iTunes predates the iPod.

    Some people never use iTunes to buy anything, but once you have iTunes it is hard to resist visiting the iTunes Music Store. Remember, Apple is getting rid of DRM in the ITMS, and music purchased there now "plays for sure" on any device. This is much more of a middle finger to the RIAA. Keep in mind that the recording industry is looking to reduce Apple's control and influence, not increase it.

    If Apple allows Palm, iRiver and other device manufacturers to use iTunes, it gains access to potential music sales that previously would not have been Apple's. When it comes to personal listening devices, either you iPod or you don't. But - if you own an MP3 player and you buy music instead of downloading it on P2P networks, I am sure Apple would love to have your business.

    Next, consider the potential market for sales to owners of smartphones, and Apple can broaden their potential market tenfold without lifting a finger. If Palm allows the Pre to utilize iTunes without prompting or overt permission from Apple, the FTC cannot really take action against Apple for restraint of trade, monopoly practices, etc etc etc.

    Finally, iTunes exposes the user to the Mac user interface, even when running on Windows. Users may also see Apple product features "dimmed" in buttons and menus when their non-Apple product is connected. Apple could even detect that a non-Apple product is connected to their iTunes software and display marketing that targets sales to users of their competitors' products. Can you say "halo effect"?

    "I've got you this time, Brer Rabbit," said Brer Fox, jumping up and shaking off the dust. "You've sassed me for the very last time. Now I wonder what I should do with you?"

    Brer Rabbit's eyes got very large. "Oh please Brer Fox, whatever you do, please don't throw me into the briar patch."

    --
    Ask Me About... The 80's!
    1. Re:throw me in the briar patch by Keeper+Of+Keys · · Score: 1

      This all seems sensible, but on past form it seems very likely that Apple will do everything in their power to break Palm's hack.

      On the subject of iTMS avoidance, it's not so hard. I have iTunes on my laptop, because two of my family members have iPods, but I just keep saying "no" every time it offers to direct me to the store. You have to sign up before it will allow access anyway, and I have no intention of doing that.