Slashdot Mirror


Apple Update Means Palm Pre Can No Longer Sync With iTunes

endikos writes "Apple updated iTunes to version 8.2.1. According to the changelog, it offers bug fixes and 'addresses an issue with verification of Apple devices.' In other words, 'Buzz off, Palm Pre. You ain't no iPhone.'"

21 of 841 comments (clear)

  1. How it went down: by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

    Palm: "Oh no you didn't!"

    Apple: "Oh yes iDid."

    1. Re:How it went down: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Palm: "Oh no you didn't!"

      Apple: "Oh yes iDid."

      Palm: Talk to the hand.

    2. Re:How it went down: by ChefInnocent · · Score: 5, Funny

      Apple: Bite me!

    3. Re:How it went down: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Palm: *open-handed smack*

    4. Re:How it went down: by ZenAtheist · · Score: 5, Funny

      *face palm*

  2. Ironic dichotomy of Apple's Family Values by shutton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I interviewed at Apple a few years ago, and a consistent message from the developers was that *everything* they do is to make the customer experience better. Things are not done simply because they're cool -- they have to serve a purpose.

    So I find it ironic that, as a MacBook Pro user, Apple has explicitly done something to make my experience *worse*. They went much further than simply failing to "provide support for, or test for compatibility with, non-Apple digital media players." They went out of their way to harm users.

    Shame on you, Apple. Have you gotten so big that you've forgotten what it was like to be under Microsoft's thumb?

    --
    -Scott Hutton
    1. Re:Ironic dichotomy of Apple's Family Values by hattig · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I agree with you.

      Apple should erect some walls between its business units, so that the desire to do well in the mobile arena doesn't mean that their systems software unit makes changes to aid that, directly harming consumers.

      Yeah, sure, Apple provide XML files in iTunes for third party applications to use for custom sync. But why not just publish a media sync protocol and be done with it.

      I personally don't think that Apple have the balls (insert tasteless joke about radiotherapy and cancer here) to actually compete on a level playing field instead of pulling a Microsoft and leveraging their media player monopoly (arguably) to negatively affect a competitor in a different business unit.

      On the other hand, Palm should have written their own synchronisation application that tied in with iTunes/WMP/WinAmp/Files + Outlook/iCal/Thunderbird/etc. However the Pre is all cloud-like and probably only needs to get media files on with desktop sync.

    2. Re:Ironic dichotomy of Apple's Family Values by shutton · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You either are, or aren't a customer. If I'm using an Apple product that wasn't stolen, I'm an Apple customer. I received iTunes (along with iPhoto, and i-everything-else) when I purchased my MacBook Pro. That software helped sell the computer. iPhoto works fine with hundreds of different digital cameras. As it would happen, Apple doesn't make digital cameras. They don't even have to work very hard to support them thanks to standard file system layout. It's clear that Apple has made an exception for iTunes to drive their "attachment rates" in other business units. Sounds like the behavior of an up-and-coming monopoly, doesn't it? And, I'll conclude by saying that there are *plenty* of alternatives to iTunes, but Apple has been telling us for so long that iTunes is the greatest thing since gravity boots that we just all simply use it because it's the default media manager. Hm, that sounds familiar, too... :)

      --
      -Scott Hutton
    3. Re:Ironic dichotomy of Apple's Family Values by Bogtha · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ignoring trademark violations

      I don't think this is likely to be a concern anyway. There's a clear parallel with Nintendo's case where reproducing their logo was necessary for interoperability, and although it's never gone to court, the same applies to browser vendors' user-agent strings, including Apple's. Apple's Safari browser claims to be Mozilla in its user-agent string for interoperability purposes. It's hard to see how that differs from what Palm are doing.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
  3. Re:Just deserts. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Apple's devices are also virtually 100% secure, just like OS X. Having a device that has an unproven security record lie and say it is an iPhone or iPod (which neither of which has had a malware issue since their inception) is a disservice to Apple's users, so it's completely understandable why Apple would put the kibosh on the matter for good.

  4. Doubletwist? by bitkari · · Score: 5, Informative

    You could always use DVD Jon's DoubleTwist to sync the Palm Pre.

    It reads iTunes libraries (including those irritatingly hidden away on iPods/Phones) and syncs to lots of devices quite nicely.

    It's not exactly full-featured enough yet to use as your main media player, but it's really useful for moving stuff between devices.

  5. Re:Just deserts. by Nursie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And perhaps you ought to try to understand what a monopoly is and how making blanket statements about what apple are entitled to do with their stuff is stupid.

    They are able to o this precisely until they are found to be a monopoly in either market, at which point locking hardware (iPod is definitely at monopoly stage) and software (iTunes must have over half the music download market) is abusive behaviour.

    Specifically killing interop with other products is verging on illegal behavious and certainly makes them arseholes.

  6. Re:I couldn't care less by sqlrob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What DRM laden music?

  7. Re:What does this get them? by tolan-b · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Giving a rebate for not stocking a competitor? That sounds pretty much exactly like a bribe to me.

  8. Who got a Pre thinking it'd always sync w/ iTunes? by wickerprints · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously think about this for a minute. You've got a device manufacturer that creates a direct competitor to Apple's products, openly advertising that they are piggybacking onto Apple's software functionality without negotiating some kind of licensing agreement and without Apple's consent. Then Apple closes the loophole that enables this unsupported functionality. But nobody wants to blame poor underdog Palm for having done this in the first place. Your average consumer, who either is too ignorant or too self-centered to think two steps ahead, buys into the advertised functionality and then blames Apple when they decide to break it?

    That's not how the game is played, folks. If Palm wants to compete, then let them create their own service and interface rather than leveraging another company's successful work. You say that's unfair because Apple has created a heavily lopsided playing field, and now it's impossible to compete with the massive popularity of iTunes. But you have to ask yourself, where were these same competitors five years ago? What where they doing? They were twiddling their thumbs and milking the consumer for all they were worth while making incremental improvements in their devices. Then Apple came along and blew the whole mobile device market away with the iPhone and NOW they want to complain about the playing field not being level? Fuck that bullshit.

    Make no mistake, I don't particularly approve that Apple did what they did, but if you bought a Palm Pre and couldn't see this coming you are not only blind but you're an idiot. Palm, RIM, Nokia, Samsung, Sony--all the handset makers, not to mention the telecoms who still continue to nickel-and-dime consumers with exorbitant rates on SMS (for no other reason except that they can), are not, and never were, your friends just because now they're the underdogs. Same thing with the MP3 player market. These companies want you to think that slapping on features like they were afterthoughts is "technological progress." They never had the vision to rethink the whole device and the whole user experience from the bottom up. And now people have the balls to complain that Apple is a monopoly because they gave you real competition? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

  9. Re:Just deserts. by AF_Cheddar_Head · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I would have to agree. I liken this to the old saying Windows isn't done until 1-2-3 won't run. Why should a vendor be allowed to deliberately modify software so that another vendors product will not run. I do not believe that the I-tunes UELA says that I have to have an Apple device to use the software.

  10. What Palm is doing is skanky by SideshowBob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A device masquerading as another device by using the same USB manufacturer/device ID is not the way to build interoperability. It's just inviting all sorts of unintended consequences and bugs. How did this ever pass muster at Palm?

  11. Re:Sometimes Apple still thinks too much like a... by sarahbau · · Score: 5, Informative

    Maybe because apple IS a hardware company. They use software to drive hardware sales. OS X sells Macs; the iTunes Music Store sells iPods; the App Store sells iPhones. They can't very well sell their hardware if other hardware companies start circumventing the things that tie Apple's hardware to their software. The Pre pretending to be an iPhone when connecting to iTunes is similar to Psystar making PCs think they're Macs.

  12. Re:Qualifier by ocularDeathRay · · Score: 5, Funny

    [...] and let's not forget the Zune.

    no... seriously... lets

    --
    Obama is a twitter sock puppet
  13. Re:Sometimes Apple still thinks too much like a... by node+3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe because apple IS a hardware company.

    Why do people try to pigeonhole Apple into a one-or-the-other-ware company? They sell both.

    Apple's "secret ingredient" is not the software they put into their hardware, and it's not the hardware they put their software on, it's the quality of the combination of the two. They sell a system, and are one of the very few companies left who still do.

  14. Re:Who got a Pre thinking it'd always sync w/ iTun by mr_matticus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    iTunes is a defacto monopoly now and Apple better start treading more carefully.

    Why? The iTunes Store enables media acquisition, desktop playback, library organization, and is written to sync with Apple devices. All your downloads are sitting pretty, right there on your hard drive, fully available for you to use as you please. Anything you downloaded with DRM you got with the known caveat that it would only work with Apple products.

    Using tie ins to build new monopolies, which seems to be what they are doing here, is especially dangerous.

    If by build new monopolies, you mean not supporting syncing of third-party devices on their unpublished, internal protocol, then sure. But that's an uphill battle to convince anyone that that is an unlawful monopoly.

    An antitrust regulator might be inclined to say Apple's defacto monopoly on online music sales is giving them an unfair advantage in other markets, in this case the smartphone market.

    Not really. It gives them an advantage in the internal syncing department, but as a natural effect of them making both products.

    If Palm wants to access the iTunes library XML file and use that to load information in its own sync software, the file's sitting right there for them to use. Failing that, it can read the file/folder structure and metadata directly and compile its own library.

    The Pre isn't disabled. Palm tried to piggyback on iTunes using an undocumented and unsupported hack to capture a competitor's market with zero effort. Talk about unfair advantage.

    If a competitor can't bring a new smartphone to market because they can't access online music because of a monopoly

    Where can't they? 1. Buy music from Amazon, iTunes, Walmart, Microsoft, whatever. 2. Transfer files to Pre. 3. Profit.

    You can argue competitors just have to start their own competing MP3 service

    Like the rest of your comment, it's entirely off base and out of scope. Palm doesn't need an MP3 service. All they have to do, and all they had to do from the start, was put a modicum of effort into writing their own synchronization software. There's nothing particularly special about the media storage of iTunes (files and folders) or the library database (XML).

    Palm just noticed that there was a way they could get plug-and-chug support for free, and leave Apple holding the bag of dog crap when future versions of iTunes no longer worked with whatever hacked-together code was stuffed onto the Pre. Suddenly "iTunes broke my Pre!" would ring out all across the Internet.

    that is a very tall order, especially since it requires inking deals with a relatively small number of recording companies that are something of cartel themselves.

    Apple did it, and did it before the lucrative nature of the setup had empirical evidence. If anything, it should be easier to compete now.

    Get real. The iTunes Store has almost nothing to do with this. The iTunes client software, developed by Apple, supports syncing Apple devices. They're not, nor in any rational world would they be, required to support third party data transfer.

    If you want to put all smartphone manufacturers in a room and tell them to come up with an open standard for data synchronization, fine, but until that's the case, get real.

    You're babbling about nothing. Palm never had any right or reasonable expectation to be able to use Apple's unpublished protocols and expect it to work in a production environment. No one's stopping Palm from syncing the media or selling their smartphones.