Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Palm Pre To Sync Seamlessly With iTunes

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the middle-finger-included dept.

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."

60 of 178 comments (clear)

  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.

  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 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.

    6. 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?
    7. 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
    8. 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.

    9. 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.
    10. 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...

    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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!

    14. 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".

    15. 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.

    16. 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?

    17. 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.

    18. 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.
    19. 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.

    20. 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.

    21. 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).

  3. 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 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.

    3. 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.

    4. 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.

    5. 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.

    6. 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...
    7. 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
  4. 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 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.

    2. 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.

  5. 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: 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.

    2. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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)
  9. 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).

  10. 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

    --
    $5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
  11. 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.

  12. 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.
  13. 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.

  14. 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.
  15. 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)

  16. 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.
  17. 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.
  18. 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.

  19. 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.
  20. 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
  21. 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.

  22. 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?

  23. 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.

  24. 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.

  25. 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!